4 ms·

Paypals user agreement limits fund holds to 180 days. If they hold your funds after that, that's breach of contract. Time to contact state agencies and/or go t

Paypals user agreement limits fund holds to 180 days. If they hold your funds after that, that's breach of contract. Time to contact state agencies and/or go to court.

JumpCrisscross 10y ago
> Paypals user agreement limits fund holds to 180 days Search for the word "notwithstanding". It usually comes in the form "notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the rest of this agreement..." Remember that PayPal incorporates--and reserves the unilateral right to change--several policy documents into its agreements. These agreements are necessarily complicated. They're also drafted by counsel working for PayPal. At least in the case of AML, I'm reasonably certain PayPal has to, under federal law, hold funds when it suspects money laundering. Unlike banks, which have their AML policies and definitions reviewed, PayPal is relatively free in constructing this policy.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- rgbrenner 10y ago
  Did you do your own search? Because "notwithstanding" only occurs twice in PayPal's agreements: one for the right to display your trademark; and another for arbitration. PayPal's agreement requires 30 days notice of any changes, and they post the changes on their website: https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/upcoming-policies-full https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/upcoming-policies-f... Paypal's anti-money laundering rules comply with the rules set by each state that money transmitters are required to follow. The funds frozen for AML don't become paypal's -- they're seized by the government.
  - JumpCrisscross 10y ago
    > Paypal's anti-money laundering rules comply with the rules set by each state that money transmitters are required to follow It is complicated. For example, New York's Department of Financial Services "interposed no objection to PayPal offering certain of its payment processing services to New York customers without being licensed as a money transmitter" in 2002 [1]. These rules are complex alone, complex in their interrelations and subject to competing regulatory interests. I work in a regulated financial forum. I've seen, or been relayed through regulators, accounts concerning money transmitters needing to hold funds for more than 180 days to finish an investigation per their internal policy. At that point, the contract doesn't matter--statute trumps. This might be unique to New York, but I doubt we're the only state or territory with these rules (usually, our laws are the most cutting). If it's customer versus compliance, the customer almost always has to engage regulators or sue to make progress. When using money transmitters like PayPal to not only move funds but also hold them you're giving up a lot of the regulatory protection and venue-provisioning you get with more sophisticated services. If a business relies on PayPal, its management needs to talk to a lawyer and do more research. [1] http://www.dfs.ny.gov/legal/interpret/lo020603.htm http://www.dfs.ny.gov/legal/interpret/lo020603.htm
    - rgbrenner 10y ago
      yes, I agree with everything you've written here, except one thing: NY may have been ok with paypal operating that way in 2002, but that has clearly changed: https://www.paypalobjects.com/webstatic/en_US/licenses/NY_license.pdf https://www.paypalobjects.com/webstatic/en_US/licenses/NY_li...
DrScump 10y ago
Can you go directly to court, or is there an arbitration process in the way, first? What does the current TOS say?
otakucode 10y ago
An End User License Agreement only holds when it is in the best interests of the company issuing it and never at any other time. I'm pretty sure that's in there somewhere. Looking at those jokes as an actual contract is laughable.

Paypals user agreement limits fund holds to 180 days. If they hold your funds after that, that's breach of contract. Time to contact state agencies and/or go to court.

JumpCrisscross 10y ago

> Paypals user agreement limits fund holds to 180 days Search for the word "notwithstanding". It usually comes in the form "notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the rest of this agreement..." Remember that PayPal incorporates--and reserves the unilateral right to change--several policy documents into its agreements. These agreements are necessarily complicated. They're also drafted by counsel working for PayPal. At least in the case of AML, I'm reasonably certain PayPal has to, under federal law, hold funds when it suspects money laundering. Unlike banks, which have their AML policies and definitions reviewed, PayPal is relatively free in constructing this policy.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
rgbrenner 10y ago
Did you do your own search? Because "notwithstanding" only occurs twice in PayPal's agreements: one for the right to display your trademark; and another for arbitration. PayPal's agreement requires 30 days notice of any changes, and they post the changes on their website: https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/upcoming-policies-full https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/upcoming-policies-f... Paypal's anti-money laundering rules comply with the rules set by each state that money transmitters are required to follow. The funds frozen for AML don't become paypal's -- they're seized by the government.
- JumpCrisscross 10y ago
  > Paypal's anti-money laundering rules comply with the rules set by each state that money transmitters are required to follow It is complicated. For example, New York's Department of Financial Services "interposed no objection to PayPal offering certain of its payment processing services to New York customers without being licensed as a money transmitter" in 2002 [1]. These rules are complex alone, complex in their interrelations and subject to competing regulatory interests. I work in a regulated financial forum. I've seen, or been relayed through regulators, accounts concerning money transmitters needing to hold funds for more than 180 days to finish an investigation per their internal policy. At that point, the contract doesn't matter--statute trumps. This might be unique to New York, but I doubt we're the only state or territory with these rules (usually, our laws are the most cutting). If it's customer versus compliance, the customer almost always has to engage regulators or sue to make progress. When using money transmitters like PayPal to not only move funds but also hold them you're giving up a lot of the regulatory protection and venue-provisioning you get with more sophisticated services. If a business relies on PayPal, its management needs to talk to a lawyer and do more research. [1] http://www.dfs.ny.gov/legal/interpret/lo020603.htm http://www.dfs.ny.gov/legal/interpret/lo020603.htm
  - rgbrenner 10y ago
    yes, I agree with everything you've written here, except one thing: NY may have been ok with paypal operating that way in 2002, but that has clearly changed: https://www.paypalobjects.com/webstatic/en_US/licenses/NY_license.pdf https://www.paypalobjects.com/webstatic/en_US/licenses/NY_li...

DrScump 10y ago

Can you go directly to court, or is there an arbitration process in the way, first? What does the current TOS say?

otakucode 10y ago

An End User License Agreement only holds when it is in the best interests of the company issuing it and never at any other time. I'm pretty sure that's in there somewhere. Looking at those jokes as an actual contract is laughable.