It really seems as if PP has taken a turn for the worse lately. My only experience with them was a few years ago when I had a problem with someone accessing my account fraudulently. They where easy to get ahold of and proactive. A shame that doesn't seem to be the case any longer.
Isn't this the flip side of the same proactivity? PayPal is paranoid that someone is going to try to regulate them as a bank. As a result, they'll shut down anything that doesn't look 100% legitimate.
I hate to be the devil's advocate here, because it looks like HFC was truly wronged. But still: an off-shore not-quite-yet-a-charity with no paper trail, no office, and no contact info beyond a web site is hardly a paragon of transparent legitimacy. Put "hacker" in the title and things get worse for the poor PayPal pencil pusher to figure out. I'm not surprised at all that someone got cold feet and pulled the plug. That doesn't mean PayPal is "right" to do this. But their motivations are pretty clear to me.
One lesson here is that organization is your friend. A few weeks spent filling out 501c3 forms and establishing banking records (maybe finding a pro bono accountant, too) would have obviously been a good idea in hindsight. Charging off to Africa shouting "Give me money!", not so much.
No, it's been like this since near the beginning. Back when I was in the online gold sales industry (2000-2005), it was well understood that Paypal would put you out of business with their shady business practices. The gold industry has really small margins to begin with, so a single account freezing could (and often did) wipe out an exchanger.
Comments
It really seems as if PP has taken a turn for the worse lately. My only experience with them was a few years ago when I had a problem with someone accessing my account fraudulently. They where easy to get ahold of and proactive. A shame that doesn't seem to be the case any longer.
Isn't this the flip side of the same proactivity? PayPal is paranoid that someone is going to try to regulate them as a bank. As a result, they'll shut down anything that doesn't look 100% legitimate.
I hate to be the devil's advocate here, because it looks like HFC was truly wronged. But still: an off-shore not-quite-yet-a-charity with no paper trail, no office, and no contact info beyond a web site is hardly a paragon of transparent legitimacy. Put "hacker" in the title and things get worse for the poor PayPal pencil pusher to figure out. I'm not surprised at all that someone got cold feet and pulled the plug. That doesn't mean PayPal is "right" to do this. But their motivations are pretty clear to me.
One lesson here is that organization is your friend. A few weeks spent filling out 501c3 forms and establishing banking records (maybe finding a pro bono accountant, too) would have obviously been a good idea in hindsight. Charging off to Africa shouting "Give me money!", not so much.
No, it's been like this since near the beginning. Back when I was in the online gold sales industry (2000-2005), it was well understood that Paypal would put you out of business with their shady business practices. The gold industry has really small margins to begin with, so a single account freezing could (and often did) wipe out an exchanger.