34 ms·

Upwork asking me for a $12.5k refund as the client was using someone else’s card

• miga 5y ago
  It seems like UpWork failed to do due dilligence, and now wants to get somebody to pay for it. They frequently delay payments just because they await your validation after all. So the fault is on their side, but they may try to twist your hand, since they are big company and you are dependent on them.
• nickdothutton 5y ago
  Part of the job of the platform provider is to make sure that both parties are genuine. That the buyer is who they say they are and is not using stolen money, and that the seller (in this case you) actually delivered what has been contracted. Upwork has failed at job 1, and one presumes continues to fail at it unless they have introduced all-new sign-up/diligence processes since then.
• billyharris 5y ago
  Things are getting more strict with upwork and other such freelancing platforms. I was also using my friend's paypal but then they blocked that particular account and asked me to connect with my own account.
  • beckman466 5y ago
    > I was also using my friend's paypal but then they blocked that particular account can i ask why you were using a friend's account?
  • Grimburger 5y ago
    Have you considered using your own paypal or bank account to work on freelancing platforms? This almost reads as satire.
• anovikov 5y ago
  The question is: have they actually refunded Robin? He (his friend, in who's name the card was) received the chargeback? If not, then this is a scam and you need to call the police. But i believe he did. If so, what is the problem about asking Robin to simply pay again? And the situation is trivial: no platform would survive if they allowed freelancers keep the money earned by carding, because it would be flooded with carders. Full disclosure: i made over $2M on Upwork.
  • cyberpunk 5y ago
    That sounds like rather a lot of money. If you don't mind my asking, doing what and over what kind of timeframe?
    • desdiv 5y ago
      He has his upwork profile linked in his HN profile. Sounds like he has a niche and he's very very good at it.
      • pcthrowaway 5y ago
        Actually the rates don't even seem that high (GP would make 80% of that right?) The total hours they've listed as completed would take me at least 13 years to complete, probably longer.
        • anovikov 5y ago
          My actual lifetime average commission paid to Upwork is under 10% actually. People who repeat the claim about 20 (or 30! in this thread itself!) commission just don't read the rules. I interpret the rules as "commission is 5% plus $550 per client", which makes it sound a lot lower. How much does it cost to get 1 client "from the internet"? I know the answer and it's not pretty at all. And yes i'm on the platform for precisely 13 years, but bulk of money comes from fixed price contracts anyway, and effective rates there are ca. $300 an hour. Most of money was made in the last 2 years anyway.
  • 5y ago
• godman_8 5y ago
  That's Upwork's fault for allowing the fraudulent transaction and they're trying to steal from you so they don't have to own their fuck up.
  • tyingq 5y ago
    As a former merchant, I wouldn't argue that the freelancer owns this. But, I also don't think Upwork really "allowed the fraudulent transaction". The banks and credit/debit card companies allowed it. And they have a lot more contextual background information on the buyer, seller, and transaction than the merchant does.
    • jtbayly 5y ago
      Yes, but isn't this exactly what Upwork gets paid to take care of? The only way that Upwork's actions are justified is if the author was complicit in this scam. In which case, he wouldn't have really been working, and he would have split the money back with Robin, the guy who "hired" him on Upwork. But in that case, Upwork would obviously kick the author off of Upwork, not ask them to continue working.
      • ethbr0 5y ago
        The hierarchy of information and scale here, from most to least, seems to obviously be: banks, Upwork, freelancer. Or, to put it another way, requiring the freelancer to pay this begs the question: "What could the freelancer have done to avoid this?" To which the only answer is: everything Upwork is abstracting away and doesn't want their freelancers doing. Do a background check on the client. Obtain the client's actual payment methods and verify them with the bank. Etc. All of which are literally Upwork's functions in this arrangement, because like PayPal, they exist to centralize and decrease friction between two semi-trusting parties. And when that goes bad, it's bullshit for them to transfer the consequences of that onto someone who lacked the access to detect or fix it in the first place, by Upwork's design! It'd be like Uber requiring a passenger to pay an insurance claim, because their driver was involved in an accident and didn't have auto insurance.
• pjc50 5y ago
  This is beyond "complain on HN" level, this is "take legal action" level ...
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • troymc 5y ago
    To be fair to the original author/freelancer, they didn't "complain on HN." They wrote a blog post, and someone shared it on HN. But yes, this does seem like something for the courts to sort out. In Saskatchewan, I'd use Small Claims Court (inexpensive, no lawyer needed); I guess there is something similar in the freelancer's jurisdiction.
  • nikanj 5y ago
    The court of public opinion works much faster and has much lower costs. I'd absolutely try HN before I try the courts.
• frogger8 5y ago
  this user’s post needs to be up voted to the top of the front page. upwork has millions of contractors throughout the world and can afford to cover this cost. Obviously not all users / contractors are not active every month. But they take a good chunk of the cut.
• aneutron 5y ago
  If you have Robin's contacts, I would suggest you get a lawyer and sue him personally. You have made work for him which hasn't been paid (because the money was taken back). To my untrained eyes that seems pretty much a classic case of unpaid dues. Just get a consultation with a lawyer either way, it's the surest thing to do.
  • gog 5y ago
    He has a contract with Upwork, Upwork has a contract with Robin, so Upwork is the one that should be on the hook for this and they should go after Robin if they want to try and recoup their loss.
    • mabbo 5y ago
      Name both in the lawsuit. Someone has to pay for the work done.
    • implements 5y ago
      I have a friend who used to be a commercial lawyer - she said one of the things that disillusioned her about the job is that regardless of contract it was often the case the party most able to be made to bear the loss ended up losing (ie whoever had insurance). It’s easier for Upwork to force the contractor to work for free than to sue ‘Robin’ because suing is difficult and costly, and the contractor is over a barrel if he wants to continue with Upwork.
• 300bps 5y ago
  Chargeback periods are typically limited to 120 days. This means a cardholder cannot generally dispute charges older than about 4 months. https://chargebacks911.com/chargeback-time-limit/ https://chargebacks911.com/chargeback-time-limit/ There can be exceptions to this but I have never heard of a chargeback over this period and certainly charges a year or two old would be crazy. Maybe what happened is that the cardholder initiated a chargeback on the most recent charges and Upwork decided on their own to refund them all? In any case, it is primarily Upwork’s job to validate credit cards. If their position is that they failed to do that for two years and they have no responsibility, that is wrong.
  • CRConrad 5y ago
    > There can be exceptions to this but I have never heard of a chargeback over this period and certainly charges a year or two old would be crazy. > Maybe what happened is that the cardholder initiated a chargeback on the most recent charges and Upwork decided on their own to refund them all? What's to say this is "them all"? I read it as these $12,500 being what was charged back; this doesn't tell us how much has been paid earlier and not charged back.
• altacc 5y ago
  Remember, companies will always look after themselves before anyone else. If Upwork is the middleman here providing a payment platform, then I'd expect them to swallow the cost of card fraud, not the freelancer. I suspect individual freelancers have a theoretical dollar value in their calculations and it's never going to be bigger than the company accepting a financial risk. I do wonder why the author is still on Upwork, their rating & exposure on there must be worth more to them than working several weeks for free, but personally I'd walk. I also don't understand why the pay back is not pro-rata instead of full time, allowing freelancers in this position to earn some money to pay the bills whilst paying back the chargeback (although they shouldn't be paying it at all). If the author is in the same country as the client then they should also be taking legal action to reclaim the money (which again, Upwork should be doing).
  • beckman466 5y ago
    > I do wonder why the author is still on Upwork, their rating & exposure on there must be worth more to them than working several weeks for free why should they have to walk away? why even suggest such a strategy? UpWork already has a 10% market share. so if there were 1000 employers, 100 of them would be the same company. i'm not sure if you're aware of all the gigification and precaritization of digital labor going on? it's emerging as a frontal assault; a full-force attack on labor rights. "For all of its forward-looking ‘innovation’, there’s something suspiciously feudal about Silicon Valley. Tech royalty compete for dominance in platform wars [...] They hoard resources while showering key personnel with lavish gifts to ensure loyalty and peddling a compelling story about their right to rule. Meanwhile, the remaining workers, dependent on ‘gigs’ for their livelihood, are made to battle with each other for scraps." https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/01/abolish-silicon-valley https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/01/abolish-silicon-valley
    • dahfizz 5y ago
      > why should they have to walk away? why even suggest such a strategy? Why would you want to continue doing business with someone who will unpredictability charge you large sums of money?
• lurker616 5y ago
  Is Robin not open to paying $12500 again through a separate method? If Robin is a scammer, then Upwork needs to take the loss here for not validating the money payment method.
  • rubyfan 5y ago
    That was my reaction, the $12,500 debt should land on Robin’s account not the freelancer. Robin needs to make their own account whole, especially since it sounds like there were other freelancers effected. The freelancer shouldn’t need to pay anything back. These platforms claim to be “matchmaking services” so they can avoid this sort of issue. But if that’s really the case why do they handle billing at all? These platforms want to make sure they skim their profits from the top but when shit hits the fan they provide no protection for the freelancer.
    • fundad 5y ago
      Since Robin never paid the original bills or he did and they were just refunded, can’t he pay directly?
    • xtracto 5y ago
      Exactly my thought... according to the article the freelancer and Robin know each other and are in good terms. If Robin realized he defrauded Upwork by mistake, he should just pay up. If he doesn't, then he is actually willingly defrauding upwork, who should throw the book at him.
  • lobocinza 5y ago
    I think so, this story is strange. Working for a client you meet on Upwork or negotiating payment outside of Upwork goes against their ToS so you would expect them to deal with it at least morally if not legally. If Robin were to pay the client outside Upwork for the $12500 charged back does the freelancer still owns Upwork 20% of the earnings? If Robin isn't paying and Upwork isn't covering the fraud is the freelancer still required to pay the 20% fees?
• CPLX 5y ago
  There’s a few different ways to go here and a lot depends on your jurisdiction (presumably Europe?) but this feels like wage theft. I’m sure Upwork has armies of lawyers who would argue that you’re an actual business and this is a business to business dispute. And I’m sure you accepted some 78 page document that says that too. But unless you have an incorporated entity and are operating like a business I’m not so sure a regulator would see it that way. There’s a lot of laws out there involving freelance workers, subcontractors, and so on, and I’d figure out which of them apply to you. Also like others have said you don’t owe them anything don’t do more work on Upwork to pay off this “debt” fuck that. And also chargebacks in the US at least have strict time limits, so the amount of delay here in informing you seems relevant. But not sure what the rules are where you are.
• mucholove 5y ago
  Dude, get off Upwork. Do not do any work for them. Invest that time and build your name on your own or some other platform. Take your clients off Upwork. Would love to see what you’re doing. You don’t owe them a thing.
  • throw8932894 5y ago
    This! Middle man just adds risks and fees! Keep working 2 years for the same client via Upwork is not very smart.
• NikolaeVarius 5y ago
  > At the moment of this writing, I’m still on the platform. It’s a little bit demotivational knowing that the next 230 hours that I’ll work will go to Upwork instead of me because of this, so I’m slowed down on a motivational level. The fuck is wrong with you. Drop Upwork
  • mromanuk 5y ago
    Why would you continue to work with such a crappy company, that handled it so badly? As a middleman they at least should absorb this type of events. They get a cut for every hour worked by the freelancer, this is outrageous.
  • myaccoun90 5y ago
    You're underestimating how hard it is to find paying customers.
    • imdsm 5y ago
      This is true, but on the other hand, the alternative is to work 230 hours for free with no guarantee this won't happen again in the future. It's a difficult decision.
      • nopenopenopeno 5y ago
        It’s a labor issue, not a “difficult decision” that an individual should ever have to make. It’s a failure of our society.
    • LadyCailin 5y ago
      Clearly, because UpWork can’t even find paying customers.
  • imdsm 5y ago
    Agreed. Drop it before you take on any cost. Get in touch with all current clients outside of Upwork and offer your services direct.
• yholio 5y ago
  From a business strategy perspective, it makes a lot of sense not to eat the credit card risk, otherwise you commit yourself to a very bad position: scammers will signup on your platform as both buyers and sellers and effectively launder stolen credit cards. From a labor rights perspective, they are clearly not a small business that can take contractual risk, they are a de facto employee dependent on the revenue the Upwork platform generates. Withholding payment for work done is a major abuse. Each side has their truth and I cannot see how it can be resolved in the general case without regulatory intervention in the area of platform labor.
  • freemint 5y ago
    > From a business strategy perspective, it makes a lot of sense not to eat the credit card risk, otherwise you commit yourself to a very bad position Well yeah but if they don't they put their contractors in an even worse position because it's unlikely they can each build their own fraud detection infrastructure.
• katzgrau 5y ago
  Real advice: Use Upwork (or similar for legal, in the US there's Upcounsel) to find a lawyer in your country and post your job with a link to this article. Getting a lawyer involved will straighten things out fast. Upwork should eat the loss, no question. It'll easily cost Upwork more than 12k in time and resources if they try to defend it. It'll cost you a few hundred USD at minimum but it'll be worth it.
  • ethbr0 5y ago
    This is hilariously apropos. Kudos for the suggestion.
  • generalpf 5y ago
    This is a great idea but what prevents Upwork from kicking him off the platform for pissing them off? Or maybe there’s an arbitration clause in the agreement too?
  • wpietri 5y ago
    If I were Upwork, I wouldn't be measuring this against the cost to defend this one instance. I'd be measuring it against the cost of the next 10 years of instances of credit card fraud where there's insufficient evidence of people actually doing the work. If they are seen as soft on this, it opens them up to a class of fraud where freelancer and client collude to milk stolen credit cards. Or where a fraudster just pretends to be both sides.
    • notahacker 5y ago
      Honestly, if I was a fraudster and I read a description of Upwork's actions here I'd be delighted. If I pay myself with a stolen card via two accounts through Upwork, their standard policy is to ignore the card fraud account and tell the freelancer account(s) the transaction was laundered through that they'll have to pay Upwork back out of future earnings, if any. That's a fraudster's dream antifraud policy, because they have no intention of using any freelancer accounts they create for real work so there's nothing lost, no police are involved, and Upwork doesn't even care if someone is willing to testify that someone admits to using someone else's card and knows where they live! Upwork's behaviour is no deterrent to actual multiple account fraudsters at all, and positive encouragement to fraudsters with stolen cards that can profit from selling on actual work done by actual freelancers. The only context it makes sense is if they're pretty sure the freelancer account is an innocent party they're happy to continue to use their platform, but figure it's cheaper and easier to squeeze them for the chargeback than chase the person who entered the fraudulent cards.
• tlogan 5y ago
  I believe the problem here is that upwork thinks Robin and him are the same person. They probably have proof that both Robin and you login from same IP (since you met each other). If robin is not cooperating (not wanting to pay for your work - which then you give money for charge back), then you can go after Robin. You got scammed.
  • 300bps 5y ago
    My initial reaction was incredulity against Upwork because this story as described doesn’t seem to make sense. You reminded me though that freelancer sites are one of the easiest ways to turn stolen credit cards into cash. It does sound like OP flagged for this at Upwork.
    • piaste 5y ago
      However, OP claimed to have sent Upwork proof of two years of actual projects completed. While Upwork doubtlessly asked for them to verify that OP had not been scamming the client, it also shows that two years of real work had been done. A credit card launderer would not have had such material at hand.
      • alisonkisk 5y ago
      • tlogan 5y ago
        So he got scammed by Robin. And Robin was smart to meet the guy so Upwork has reason to believe that contractor is also a scammer (the account is not closed because they want to recover the money first). Without cooperation from Robin this is a hard case for the contractor. If he had logging by screenshots it might be easier but with manual logging of hours there is very little reason to believe. In short, Robin scammed the contractor using “contractor friendly” tactics: manual logging, let’s meet, etc. Upwork does warn about that, but scammers will tell something like “I trust you”, “upwork invides your privacy”, etc.
• imdsm 5y ago
  I'd be looking to get "Robin" to put in writing that he used the wrong card. Surely it is Robin who owes Upwork, not OP who owes Upwork. I'd also want Upwork to answer a few questions: 1. Did the cardholder receive their money back? 2. If so, how much exactly? 3. How much of that amount did you receive, after fees? 4. Is "Robin" still active on the Upwork platform? 5. Do Upwork have the contact details of "Robin"? 6. What actions have they taken to recover these costs from "Robin"? 7. Who was the person whose card "Robin" had access to? 8. Why did it take them so long to spot the charges? There are so many questions here. They can't just close the case. It's not a support ticket. This is a legal matter. If OP stops working right now, then he does pay the costs, but he does then have to find another income. For anyone wants to try and help OP, consider liking/retweeting this: https://twitter.com/imdsm/status/1480176898600845312 https://twitter.com/imdsm/status/1480176898600845312
  • pirate787 5y ago
    Agree -- particularly #8. Credit cards generally have a 120 day time limit for disputing charges for fraud.
    • wpietri 5y ago
      Do they? Mine is 6 months. And probably not coincidentally, it's 6 months worth of payments that he has had pulled back.
• capybara_2020 5y ago
  Isn't the whole point of Upwork to safe guard both sides and why people pay them? What is the benefit here. This is as good as directly working with a client. Atleast then you keep all the money without having to pay Upwork a cut. Why continue working on Upwork? They are clearly not providing any value if they did not even do a basic verification to see if the card belonged to the client.
• ishanjain28 5y ago
  Exact same thing happened with me couple of years back on Freelancer. They take a 10-20% cut and don't do anything to protect you against frauds. If the client used someone else's card to pay your fees, It's you who has to return it back to freelancer when the payment is reverted by the CC company.
• jwithington 5y ago
  what’s the point of upwork being a middle man in the transaction if they don’t assume any risk?
  • anizan 5y ago
    this is the entire point of business model innovation that you then sell to your investors so that they can have a good nights sleep knowing they will be richer in the morning.
  • Ekaros 5y ago
    Not sure about Upwork, but not having to setup sole proprietorship or LLC. Possibly simpler taxation and so on.
• irjustin 5y ago
  I hope this gets the visibility it needs and some lawyers get involved. As many others have mentioned, if this is a fair world (i really want it to be), this is Upwork's problem and them eating the cost. Funds not being "good" is not the freelancer's problem. It's literally why you use/pay a platform like Upwork. So you don't have to deal with wether the bank transfer happened. i.e. How does the freelancer have any knowledge, power or ability to know whether the credit card being used is legit?
  • irjustin 5y ago
    I've since learned from other threads that this exists because otherwise creditcard fraud would be very easy to perform.
    • piaste 5y ago
      How does passing the cost to the freelancer (who has ZERO ability to verify credit card ownership) make CC fraud any harder? If anything it's the opposite. If I were a fraudster, this blog post would encourage me to use stolen CCs on Upwork, knowing that the platform will simply steal from the freelancer instead of coming after me.
      • irjustin 5y ago
        Super late, but the analogy is eBay/Amazon seller. With tangible goods, it's way more obvious that, if the seller delivered, the chargeback should fail. As the writer of the article points out, proof that the "seller delivered" wasn't strong enough so the chargeback went through. This is a poor case of Upwork <> Mastercard/Visa/etc company. It is is much easier to see in the eBay example, that if the chargeback was successful it's the seller's problem. This keeps the credit card fraud system "turning". Clearly "Proof of Work" is a huge issue. Even if Upwork 100% says the guy did all the work, the credit card company can still judge "no" and everyone is SOL.
• bryant 5y ago
  Quit the platform if the platform isn't eating the loss as a matter of failing with their own diligence work. And if they come after you, hire an attorney and manage it away from.... the internet...
• bradleyjg 5y ago
  The blog post went pretty easy Robin. It sounds like he is a criminal that stole money and the question now is who is going to end up being the victim. Maybe that should be upwork or the credit card bank, but they aren’t the main bad actor here. Why hasn’t Al filed a criminal complaint?
• xibalba 5y ago
  This is crazy. As far as I can tell, responsibility for payment/refund should fall to: 1) The entity ordering and accepting the work 2) The entity coordinating payment In the case of 1), the work was performed and the output approved and received. So it seems pretty obvious that the money is owed by them to the freelancer. In the case of 2), this entity bears responsibility for ensuring that payment is done properly. Things like, is the person paying the same as the card owner. (Btw, it sure seems like "paying with a card for an account that is not yours" is tantamount to fraud.) In other words, either the client or Upwork should be on the hook, but DEFINITELY not the freelancer.
  • visarga 5y ago
    They think Robin and the freelancer work together secretly or are the same person and this is just a credit card fraud.
• barkingcat 5y ago
  Isn't the solution for this Robin character to provide another card, one that this person actually owns, and provide 12,500 from that card directly? And if Robin doesn't want to pay, to start legal proceedings toward recovering the funds from Robin? How is the bank or Upwork the bad guy here when it is Robin who doesn't want to pay?
  • isbvhodnvemrwvn 5y ago
    What is the value of Upwork if they are not the middle man here? They were taking the payments, they should take the risk of fraudulent payments.
    • nikanj 5y ago
      It's a very common business model nowadays. Turo did the same w.r.t car rentals, there's endless stories about people getting screwed on the platform (both renters and rentees). In every single instance Turo's answer has been "Sounds like the two of you have a dispute. Sounds rough. Hope you two can figure it out!"
      • butlerm 5y ago
        Providing an illusion of service for a high price has always been a popular business model.
  • cobby 5y ago
    > How is the bank or Upwork the bad guy here when it is Robin who doesn't want to pay? Upwork takes: * 3% fee on each payment on the client side; * 20% fee of first $500 earnings with the client; * 10% fee of $500-$10k earnings with the client; * 5% fee of earnings over $10k with the client. So in this case Upwork took at least 8% of this $12.5k or 1000 USD but I think they took even more. If they don't take risks of fraudulent payments then why do they continue to take a cut in each time?
• ykevinator2 5y ago
  This is why I hate upwork. I left after about $500 and open a stripe accountn and get new clients.
• graderjs 5y ago
  You can understand Upwork's idea: they just want to pass on the risk and recover their loss. It's a normal business relationship. But I think many people are not ready for the real world that their skills lift them into: being a contractor really is being your own business, and despite all the schtick about "platforms taking care of their freelancers", it's a business relationship, and really you all need to be looking out for yourselves. At the same time, it comes across as pretty tone deaf of Upwork, and the developer attitude is understandable as well: can you imagine that if you faced similar risk from your financial / payment / banking services (such as, Payoneer or Pay Pal freezing your funds) Upwork would agree to cover you into another account until it was resolved? Highly doubt it. Shouldn't Upwork have insurance for these types of fraud cases so they specifically don't have to pass the cost onto devs? You can just refuse to refund Upwork. They are giving you the collections treatment, you can tell them to stop harassing you as well as report their behavior to the competent authority in your jurisdiction or theirs. Tell them to instead chase down the money from the payer. edit: I remember I deeply reviewed a contract for a Russian Freelancing platform that was precise and fair -- I'm quite sure it had a clause that was like, once the payment hits your bank, it's yours no matter what. But the sensible thing was they had enough other precautionary stuff in the contract about how they handled payments, disputes and clients and so on, that it looked like they could make that work. They basically covered you for any clients that tried to abscond, I think.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • akudha 5y ago
    "It is just business" - this kind of thinking is why we have shitty situations like this. Upwork is a billion dollar company, 12K is a joke to them whereas 12k is a lot of money for an individual. The customer paid Upwork using someone else's card, he didn't pay the freelancer. So the party that got duped is Upwork. They should either eat the loss or recover the money from the customer, if that is possible. Notice the only party that is getting screwed here is the little guy? Why is this acceptable? Maybe this should NOT be "normal business relationship"?
    • 5y ago
• dtob 5y ago
• paradite 5y ago
  For those who are not familiar with the parties involved in a credit transaction / chargeback, here is a good illustration of the process: https://www.case.org.sg/consumer_guides_consumeralerts_archive.aspx?month=November&year=2017 https://www.case.org.sg/consumer_guides_consumeralerts_archi... Assuming the events described in the blogpost are factual, this is what happened: The card issuer is representing the "someone else" to get back the money. The acquiring bank for Upwork complied with the request and deducted the money from the Upwork(the merchant)'s business account with them. Then, it is Upwork's decision to recoup their losses in their business account with the acquiring bank by asking Al to work for free.
• TheChaplain 5y ago
  Search HN for "upwork" and it shows soo many reasons to avoid them.
• DannyBee 5y ago
  As a lawyer - contact a lawyer. This is enough money that i would not eat it. You cannot, in fact, be forced to work for free and forced to eat the cost of fraud. This kind of case will be taken on contingency
  • JackFr 5y ago
    Indeed contact the police as well. The ‘client’ is quite simply a thief. Using someone else’s credit card without permission to obtain thousands of dollars of services is criminal fraud. Ultimately he should be the one forced to make restitution under court order.
    • u801e 5y ago
      This may be difficult due to the fact that the defendant and plaintiff are in different countries. The costs for pursuing this action may well exceed the actual loss.
      • bjornsing 5y ago
        I thought they were both in Zurich... no?
        • DannyBee 5y ago
          That was my understanding as well. If they are in different countries, it would definitely be time consuming and costly.
          • u801e 5y ago
            I think the author was in Zurich temporarily, but resides in another country based on what he wrote here: >> Why would a bank take my side (a freelancer from another country) instead of his own actual client who never actually requested those services? It's definitely possible that the author resides in the same country, but he doesn't go into detail in the article.
          • 5y ago
• dqpb 5y ago
  Post this to Twitter and @mention Hayden Brown. Let it be her problem too.
• alisonkisk 5y ago
  Smells fishy. > I could’ve easily gotten paid from Robin outside of Upwork. So why doesnt he get the money from Robin who hasn't paid yet and pay Upwork back? Barring that, just leave Upwork and don't return the money they asked for. Anyone can ask you for money, and you can say no.
• sovietmudkipz 5y ago
  I’m surprised upwork is willing to take the reputation hit of a scandalous story for a measly $12,500. I’m surprised OP is working for free. Strange… Ideally, upwork works with the client to get the money owed. If it is a mistake and the client is willing to make all parties whole, great. If not and the client is unwilling to come up with a solution then I consider the client a scammer. Strange story.
• pingsl 5y ago
  Why didn't Upwork ask Robin to pay this refund in the first place? I think Upwork treats freelancers as their employees. So Upwork believes it can manipulate them.
• pipitura 5y ago
  Isn't it purpose for Upwork to verify all added cards and accounts? If they are money processor and they have problem with this, they should be more strict and just ask for a passport or ID. Or biometric verification, whatever. But that would mean more costs and loosing some people, right Upwork?
• ffhhj 5y ago
  Upwork must have been insured on credit card fraud, if so they are deceiving the freelancer to get x2 compensation.
• __debugger__ 5y ago
  What baffles me is that in the US banking system one can claim refund for a payment made two years ago without a proper legal process! This should significantly reduce trust in the system. As a business, the money in my bank account can be taken back at any point and the onus of fighting back for it is on me. How is that reasonable?
• someonehere 5y ago
  Is it me or is it obvious Robin might be a fraud? Like “Catch me If You Can” kind of fraud. Seeing that they worked on investment presentations tells me Robin might be a fraud out the gate. Grifters grift you by being your buddy and not some sketchy person selling you a used Rolex hanging on the inside of a trench coat.
• nulbyte 5y ago
  As someone who works for a bank, I can shed some light on this. > ... he said this is a bit of a mess-up as he forgot that there is “a credit card connected in his account that wasn’t actually his”. The typical chargeback is for a billing dispute, but this does not describe a billing dispute. If the client was authorized by the cardholder to use the card (ever, not just for these charges), the bank considers the charges authorized. The bank isn't going to get involved in a conflict with the cardholder and an authorized third-party. However, if authorization was never provided and the charges are reported timely, the bank will take liability and pursue their collection. In case of fraud, the bank might charge back to the merchant, but only if the merchant failed follow their contractual obligations in accepting the payment. In any case, I presume you have no way to knowing that the card was not your client's card, since you did not actually process the payment. This should be enough to get you off the hook, but only if you were truthful about your interactions with your client. > Why would a bank take my side (a freelancer from another country) instead of his own actual client who never actually requested those services? Because their business model depends on it: They make money when their clients get charged. If the cardholder ever get the client permission to use the card, the charges are valid, and the bank makes money. > Let me get this straight — Upwork, a billion-dollar company, wants me, a freelancer, to work for free on their platform for approximately 230 hours (with my hourly rate) because a client on their platform was using someone else’s credit card? This sounds generous. Often, payment processors want immediate repayment of chargebacks, especially ones as larges as these. > How in god’s name is that my fault? That depends. If you tried to protect your client by hiding from Upwork the fact that your client acknowledged using someone else's card, then that's how. If you were honest with Upwork, then I don't see they can recoup these charges from you, unless the contract you have with them says so.
  • jessaustin 5y ago
    The "light" you've "shed" might be relevant in some idealized scenario. How does anyone (issuing bank, acquiring bank, Upwork, or contractor) figure out whether "the client was authorized by the cardholder to use the card"? Do they just ask the client? Do they just ask the cardholder? Of course neither of those parties may be trusted at this point. A court could render an opinion, if the case ever got to that point. However, it won't get to that point, because of the actions of the acquiring bank. They have just decided it's the contractor's fault with minimal investigation, and have charged Upwork the maximum. Please note: this what banks usually do, regardless of the lies you might tell your customers.
• asah 5y ago
  The counter-attack is people using Upwork as an advertising platform, i.e. take a small initial job paid through them, then for future work have the client pay directly. By the dollar, it's lower fees and lower expectations of Upwork. Counter-example: for US employers, Upwork is a godsend when paying overseas staff, because they handle the legal, tax and reporting complexities.
• PragmaticPulp 5y ago
  Allowing credit card payments through a 3rd party intermediary makes this situation very messy. Non-payment is actually a surprisingly common problem in the world of freelancing. You won’t see it if you have a handful of established, trusted clients. However, it crops up a lot if you deal with individuals, entrepreneurs, or startups. As an individual, you can simply refuse credit card payments completely. You can also stop work completely until the client is caught up on payments. With Upwork, can you even choose to reject credit card payments? Or are you forced to take the risk of credit card chargebacks? As for recourse: The amount is high enough to get a lawyer involved. Go after Robin, demonstrate non-payment, get a judgment. I’m guessing Upwork’s legalese and corporate counsel aren’t worth going after.
• jlturner 5y ago
  Consider contacting your lawyer. You likely have grounds to sue “Robin” and/or UpWork for wage theft.
• stevespang 5y ago
• mizzao 5y ago
  I think that as a result of writing this and getting upvoted on HN, something will happen to resolve it. The pen is indeed mightier than the sword.
• offminded 5y ago
  I got off from Upwork quite some time ago now. I hate the way they do business and throw developers under the bus at first bump on the road. I am looking forward for the day that some Web3 equivalent is built and become leader in the space.
  • wapxmas 5y ago
    How could web3 facilitate the issue?
• JackFr 5y ago
  What doesn’t add up to me is why is there no criminal prosecution or cause of action against the original client? You can’t use someone else’s credit card without permission to obtain thousands of dollars if services. While the CC bank will charge back those purchases because they were fraudulently made, according to TFA, there is no dispute about the work actually being done and no one seems to be going after the person who benefitted from the work. So I’m beginning to think, as they say, there’s more to the story.
• tartoran 5y ago
  To avoid this the work delivery should go with an escrow service. Work isn’t delivered until the payment is fully approved. Etc
• sjreese 5y ago
  This is a known type of visa crime and should be insured against. Visa losses 100 million a year by sophisticated visa fraud. At Citibank it was part of the job to pay. The crime is setup multilayered fake bank in a secure jurisdiction, fake customer inside the network (CIA,MOSSAD) and a cardholder 50,000 dollar limit so no flags - all is validated via visa including in charge. Then no payment and months later an investigation that uncovers fraud then visa is the enforcer and based on your dependence YOU WILL PAY. Citibank pays!, With 100 million accounts at 23% profit the amount paid is a drop in the bucket. Upwork paid as well and is now holding the bag for not having the insurance
• indymike 5y ago
  The problem in this story is that Robin, the buyer/payer has committed credit card fraud, and now UpWork has $12,500 in uncollected invoices where they've paid the developer already. Robin the buyer/client's, "oopsie, I used the wrong card" can easily be fixed by using the right card. As a buyer, I love gig boards. As a developer, I don't.
• yua_mikami 5y ago
  Can't you just do nothing then manually submit the 230 hours? How will they actually verify it?
• throwaway14356 5y ago
  lets pretend this was cli foss with a protocol using bank transfers or even crypto.
• NickHirras 5y ago
  Section 6.5 discusses non-payment by client, and charge backs. https://www.upwork.com/legal#clientpayments https://www.upwork.com/legal#clientpayments I think just to preserve brands goodwill, Upwork should absorb the cost (which they have to this point), pursue legal action against the client, and not punish the freelancer. I don't know the legality of withholding payments for future work due to the freelancer. I don't believe they have a right under the terms to do that, but I would not do any future work for free. That could be a breach of contract on Upwork's part, although haven't read through these terms enough to know that.
• JoeAltmaier 5y ago
  Deadbeat clients are everywhere - it's the Contractors' Lament. Did Upwork promise to shield Contractors from that? No? Nothing new here. Move on.
• leveraction 5y ago
  The freelancer's story seems a little suspicious to me. "Let me translate this. Robin has been using someone else’s credit card for two years..." followed by "I’m on very good terms with Robin." Clearly, 'Robin' is a thief and it is entirely possible that Robin and the freelancer are one and the same. That the freelancer is not asking Robin for the money even though he knows him personally is telling. Does the freelancer wonder what his good client Robin thinks about the fact that Robin ran up a 12K credit card bill(payable to the freelancer, ultimately) that Robin never paid?(And we know the bill was never paid or there would be no need for the claw-back) And I did not see any mention of where Upwork contacted Robin. Strange considering he was the one with “a credit card connected in his account that wasn’t actually his”. Is he still on the platform? And then he sent two years worth of work to Upwork to substantiate his claim to the money. But how could Upwork know that the work he sent was legitimately related to the transaction? Could he not have created a project request for something he had already built? Then he apparently logs ALL of his 'time' outside of the system. He said that this time was for "a brainstorming session and a few meetings" with Robin. 230 hours worth!? I notice that dates of the charge-back transactions were not provided. Was this 230 hours the entirety of the project or just a very small slice. He wrote that he had made more that 100K on Upwork and that he had other clients. That leads me to think that this 12K represented all or most of the billing on Robin's project. Was there any billing for actual implementation, or is it all brainstorming and meetings? This story does not add up to me. edit: I see in the graphic that apparently the work on Robin's project was for 1533 hours, so the 230 hours would have been just a portion. It makes me wonder what/how many other credit cards were used to pay for those other hours. Hard to believe Robin was above board for the first 1303 hours and then started paying with a stolen credit card.
  • mizzao 5y ago
    I see... although I feel empathy for the author if he was scammed, it's important to make sure this isn't just an instance of laundering stolen a credit card through Upwork.
    • Cederfjard 5y ago
      Then why draw attention by blogging about it?
• madballster 5y ago
  They are not asking him for a refund, they are informing him of a chargeback. That's a fundamental difference.
  • tyingq 5y ago
    I'm not sure there's a difference, since he's not a merchant. While you could implement a marketplace like UpWork in a way that made the credit card transaction directly associated with the providers, that's not the case here.
• oliwarner 5y ago
  Of course they can ask. They can even threaten to garnish your earnings through them, or stop you working in the platform but that only works if you agree. You don't have to work for them to pay off this "debt". Put your tools down. You're not indentured. Don't work for nothing. The dispute is between them, their customer and a bank. The actions they're taking are just the easiest for them. In their eyes, you have a livelihood on the line. Of course your going to buckle first. Short of actual legal action, you could contact all your long term clients and tell them to seek alternative escrow arrangements if they want to keep working with you. That'll likely get you banned from Upwork, but freedom has value.
• ajnin 5y ago
  I'm puzzled by this. It seems obvious that Robin committed some kind of fraud against Upwork by using someone else's credit card. Upwork should be asking him to pay his debt, not OP who (says he) didn't breach his contract. Is it Upwork becoming big enough that it can start to bully people around and make extortionate demands knowing that it will be hard to refuse ?
• comboy 5y ago
  I may be too late to get an answer, but are there decent alternatives to upwork? I'm not looking to avoid sharing profit and direct cooperation. I like the idea of it. I'm just looking for something done better.
• pkrotich 5y ago
  The Freelancer seems a little too close to the scammer who admittedly used someone else card! For a second I wondered if they’re same person… just tiny bit. Who eats the cost in this particular case is a gray area - I believe Upwork should be suing Robin to try to recover the funds. I can feel for the freelancer but the real victim is CC owner - charge back was the right move.
  • jhartr 5y ago
    This is it. I’d bet (less than the sum in question) that Al and Robin are in cahoots somewhere along the way. Makes me wonder whose name was on the card.
• z3t4 5y ago
  This is great. You can now charge the client again as he has got his money back he still owns you $12.5k Then you can walk away from Upwork with 12.5+12.5=$25k ... or take the Upwork deal.
  • CRConrad 5y ago
    Charge whom again? The "client" ("Robin") got the work done for him already, so he's not going to pay for that. At least one would guess so, based on the fact that he didn't even pay the first time, but committed credit card fraud instead. But no, he hasn't got any "money back". The one who got their money back -- via credit card backcharge -- was the card holder, who was and is not "the client": They neither ordered nor received any work, and presumably don't want it. So why would they pay for it again, after they've just managed to undo at least some part of what they wrongly paid before? If this was serious: You have got this all totally backwards. If it was supposed to be a joke: It was too stupid to even be funny.
    • z3t4 5y ago
      The one who made the order ("Robin") has not paid the contractor. This makes it possible for the contractor to claim that "Robin" owns him the money. "Robin" is a real world person who the contractor has met, so the contractor can send an invoice to "Robin" for the work and hopefully "Robin" will pay. If "Robin" does not pay they can go to court and it will very likely work out in the contractors favor.
      • CRConrad 5y ago
        > The one who made the order ("Robin") has not paid the contractor. He is not supposed to: he is supposed to pay Upwork. Which he did (only with someone else's credit card); Upwork then paid the contractor. > This makes it possible for the contractor to claim that "Robin" owns him the money. No, the contractor got his money (from Upwork) in the first place; at the moment he is not owed any money. The actual holder of the credit card (not "Robin") then issued a chargeback on the credit card, and the card company apparently took the money back from Upwork. So the one that's out of money at the moment -- and therefore thinks they're owed it back -- is Upwork, nobody else. Being the middle man in these transactions is precisely what Upwork is all about. That's why they put "You're not allowed to start charging the client on your own for a gig begun via Upwork" in their TOS -- which the contractor says he honoured. And he must be telling the truth there: Otherwise the payment wouldn't have gone via Upwork -- which it must have done, or it couldn't have been charged back from them. The whole deal here is that there is not one transaction here, but two: The client pays Upwork; Upwork keeps a cut of that payment; then Upwork pays the rest of it to the contractor. But what do Upwork do for their cut of the original payment? The very least they can do for inserting themselves as a middleman in what would otherwise have been a single transaction between two other parties is that they secure payments due to themselves, don't you think? IOW: The whole Upwork model is based on decoupling the payment for work into two separate transactions. The contractor accepted and obeyed those terms. Therefore, the fraudulent transaction didn't involve the contractor: It was between Upwork and the client. Which of course makes Upwork's current idea of clawing back the money they were defrauded of by "Robin" from the contractor, who was not involved in that fraudulent transaction, (by basically decreeing that any future work he might do via them would be all their cut) ludicrous on the face of it. But that's maybe not even the main point here. The point is: It's Upwork's headache, not the contractor's. That is, in large part, what he lets them take their cut for. He shouldn't have to bother with suing "Robin" -- that's Upwork's job.
• czbond 5y ago
  Their problem, not yours. Their argument won't hold up in court.
• tlogan 5y ago
  I do not understand this part: > "I’m on very good terms with Robin." So why Robin does not want to pay and help with Upwork if he is on very good terms with him? If you are in very good terms with Robin, then just ask him to pay for work. If he refuses (and he is not scammer), you can open a case in Upwork and then you will go in arbitration. The arbitration is quite reasonable and works well (I had to run one). But if Robin is a scammer - then I'm really really sorry for you. There is very little you can do without lawyers and law enforcements.
  • ec109685 5y ago
    At the point before everything went south, he was on good terms with Robin. It talks about that ending when he was informed about the credit card issue.
• ipython 5y ago
  I’m surprised the credit card company acted in this manner. I “hired” a lawyer - later I realize how scummy and potentially illegal their services were - for about $3,000. They proceeded to perform about what I would consider next to no work on my behalf. I contacted my cc company to perform a chargeback and was denied. Upon further reflection I should have sued the lawyer in small claims court but I was somewhat embarrassed by the whole affair and just let it drop. Unfortunately in this case I feel like upwork is worse than not as you’re not directly negotiating and proving your case to the cc company. I would imagine upwork put about zero effort into defending this guy, because hey, he’ll just work for free for the next two months! No risk here!
• baskethead 5y ago
  I used to work in fintech. Getting a chargeback from 2 years ago is unheard of. Even 6 months is stretching it from the most generous credit card provider, AMEX. I would just ignore it and close my upwork account and change bank accounts. It sounds like bullshit to me.
• gus_massa 5y ago
  Did Upwork send a message confirming that "Robin" used another person card, or that is just what "Robin" said?
• hartator 5y ago
  > But that’s not the client asking for the money. That’s the credit card owner, who is another person. How can you be sure of that? Robin can just be lying. In both cases, Robin opening the chargeback or Robin using someone else’s credit card, it’s Robin responsibility to pay you! Not sure why OP is so adamant to protect Robin.
  • CRConrad 5y ago
    > Not sure why OP is so adamant to protect Robin. Is he?!? Where, when, how?
• jacquesm 5y ago
  That is completely ridiculous, they can't pass the risk of them not doing their job on to the contractors. They want to be in the payment stream, fine, but that comes with a price tag attached. If you don't do proper KYC and ensure that your 'customer' has the ability to pay and you allow them to pay via credit card (which is not at the discretion of the contractor, Upwork could have insisted on wire transfers instead) then the onus is on you, not on the contractor. This is just a blatant attempt to de-risk the company at the expense of the weakest party. I'd tell them to go jump into a lake.
  • 55555 5y ago
    This was my first thought as well but in actuality almost all marketplaces pass chargebacks through to vendors.
    • ssharp 5y ago
      That was my first reaction as well but I can't imagine all the potential fraud that takes place in these marketplace. As the market-maker, you are facilitating payments that are many multiples of the actual revenue, let along profit, you're bringing in. I'd guess that even small amounts of fraud that need to be eaten can be rather devastating. However, this is just an awful situation to be in for the contractor. It's rather difficult to have any reaction other than "Upwork needs to eat this" unless this type of thing is so common that it could have a serious impact on Upwork's viability. I remember listing an somewhat odd item on Reverb, a marketplace that facilitates buying and selling music equipment, and waiting months on a buyer only to have the only buyer being someone in a foreign country that was asking me to send the package to a "relative in Texas", who would then forward it to him. Since sending it to Texas was technically covered under Reverb's seller fraud protection policy because it was in the U.S., I made sure to dot my "i's" with Reverb on it and ensured I was protected. I never heard anything else after the transaction so hopefully everything was on the up, but from that experience, I learned that these marketplace protections do require marketplace participants follow very specific guidelines and the person dealing with this Upwork issue did not follow those guidelines.
• l8rpeace 5y ago
  I get the concept of a charge back. But upwork and the freelancer are both in contact with this 'Robin' person (who I assume won't sort out the fraudulent psyment despite admitting to the freelancer that an unauthorized card was being used). So why not have Robin sort out the payment? There's no mention of that from the freelancer or the freelancer's account of upwork's responses.
  • CRConrad 5y ago
    > So why not have Robin sort out the payment? Sure, that's what should be done. That is, that's what Upwork should do. > There's no mention of that from the freelancer or the freelancer's account of upwork's responses. Probably because it's too obvious to mention.
• gajus 5y ago
  Any freelancers reading this should research Contra. Zero commission, platform absorbs fees, dispute process friendly to freelancers, open communication with clients, built in social network. Days of closed-door marketplaces are over.
• thow16161 5y ago
  My girlfriend is a "camgirl", and this behavior reminds me of the behavior of the lower tier, more shady cam / phone-sex sites. The bigger sites that take a large percentage of the customer's money (40-50% goes to the site, not the model) also protect the models from chargebacks. Sites that take a lower percentage do not. One site she worked for ("cam model directory") has a spreadsheet of customers who are known to issue chargebacks that the models have to monitor before taking payment.
• sanguy 5y ago
  You are using Upwork as a broker. They get a slice by being the middle man. Their job is to ensure stuff like this doesn't happen. Tell them to fuck off and find another platform; and pay them nothing.
• mohanmcgeek 5y ago
  The post is from 23rd Dec and on the home page I can see a post where the author recommends freelancing using upwork. If this is true and the debacle had been happening for the last 40 days, writing a post recommending upwork is the last thing I would be doing. Secondly, why wouldn't the author get hold of "Robin" and make him pay. The post doesn't even discuss him attempting to do it.
  • smarx007 5y ago
    Nothing personal, it’s just (affiliate) business.
• kuzee 5y ago
  Taking the author's post at face value, I think the solution should be: Upwork action item: Robin needs to add a new payment instrument to cover the $12000 debt. Freeze Robin's account until then. Any fraud being perpetrated requires Robins involvement, so lean in there. Upwork action item: tell author that if author hires a lawyer they'll share information necessary for author to pursue a case against Robin. Author action item: have a lawyer take a look at case vs Upwork and Robin as joint defendants. Make the defendants sort it out. Kind of am aside, but if Upwork takes zero responsibility and provides no value for the manual payments, seems like all manually tracked work ought to be billed directly between freelancer and buyer. They won't even pursue Robin, the holder of the wrong credit card it seems even when Upwork knows who Robin is.
• knorker 5y ago
  Apparently he's a blockchain consultant. A client, presumably doing blockchain shit, committed fraud and fucked the freelancer. I'm shocked, shocked, to see fraud committed by blockchain entrepreneurs. Oh wait, that's the whole racket.
• option_greek 5y ago
  Upwork is a shitty and unethical company. Their website sucks and app doubly so. They make a lot money but have the worst product. So next time, any one on HN thinks about writing yet another todo app, think about disrupting freelancing industry and upwork. It won't be cool and won't make HN top page most likely but it will most likely be a product and monitory success.
• digitalsin 5y ago
  Upwork is a garbage platform, and if this situation really shocks you then you don't know anything about the company or the platform. My advice is to stay far away from Upwork. Fiverr is nearly as bad.
• citizenpaul 5y ago
  >We continued working via Upwork while locating in Zurich, as to not violate any Upwork terms. This is my major problem with all these "platforms" Follow our rules under the guise of protection yet when the poop hits the fan they will still try to shaft the expense onto you rather than fix their mistake while they rake in money. I bet upwork are not giving back their commisson/fee. Also this is totally on them. They took on the burden of handleng the transactions they should have caught this a long time ago. Idk poland laws but i doubt they have any legal recourse against op. Though of course they will ban him for anothet client commiting fraud while he jumped through their hoops....
• Mikeb85 5y ago
  Upwork is charging to connect clients to freelancers. They're taking a very significant commission to process payments + provide a platform. 10x more than a typical payment processor. And they don't have insurance to cover fraud? No way to uncover fraud in a timely manner? Payment processors do better... Stripe for example charges 0.4% for chargeback protection. WTF is Upwork doing here?
• wayanon 5y ago
  Isn’t it Robin’s debt to repay to the genuine cardholder?
• putlake 5y ago
  Cozy did the exact same thing, at least before their merger with Apartments.com. Tenant pays last month's rent via someone else's (ex-spouse's) credit card, then moves out, collects their security deposit, then disputes the card. Cozy supposedly tries to fight the dispute with the credit card company but landlord is not allowed to be a party of that discussion. Cozy fails to convince credit card company. Cozy asks landlord to return the money.
• rdxm 5y ago
• xivzgrev 5y ago
  Yea I don’t see how this is the freelancers fault. If anything Upwork should be going after Robin to collect - charging alternative credit cards, suing him, etc. Robin authorized the work and should be the responsible payer My guess is that Robin was uncollectable for whatever reason, and Upwork is now going after the freelancer. They don’t want to left holding the bag on the fraud, even though it’s their responsibility to prevent fraud
• Ansil849 5y ago
  This blogpost does not make sense. > Is Robin really asking for a chargeback? That’s impossible. I start investigating by calling Robin. He apologized and said he never called any bank, additionally, he said this is a bit of a mess-up as he forgot that there is “a credit card connected in his account that wasn’t actually his”. And that's the last we hear about Robin in this story. Why is that? Did Robin vanish, or otherwise fail to rectify the "mess-up"? And why doesn't the OP seem upset at the fact that Robin was very clearly a con artist?
  • replwoacause 5y ago
    Exactly. This whole story seems odd to me. Not necessarily saying the OP is in on the fraud, but I'm in agreement that this "Robin" seems to have gotten off pretty easily here. Too easily.
  • alibarber 5y ago
    “A bit of a mess up where he forgot it was someone else’s card”, yeah, and I bet not actually paying any bills for 12K of labour helped make it very easy to forget too…
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• natch 5y ago
  I don’t understand why this person doesn’t go back to Robin, who apparently is great but got all kinds of work done for free, and ask him to either make payment or set up some placeholder tasks and pay for those as a way to make up for the reversed payments.
• CyberSimon 5y ago
  I'm surprised no one has suggested, split future Upwork income. 50% goes to the debt and 50% goes to the developer. He's not working for free and they get their money back. It's the only solution that is equitable to all parties. BTW - I have extensive experience in credit card processing. It is VERy DIFFICULT to reverse a chargeback. Upwork is at the mercy of Visa/MC/Amex, and the developer is at the mercy of Upwork. Upwork can choose to not use Visa/MC/Amex but they add enough value to accept the chargeback risk. The developer can choose to not use Upwork but they add enough value to accept the chargeback risk. He can walk away from this, use a competing platform, and not pay a dime. Upwork has already paid back the $12k+ and are stuck, which is the primary reason why they should consider the 50/50 split of future income.
• anonymousiam 5y ago
  Maximum period for a valid charge-back is 120 days. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/chargeback-period.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/chargeback-period.asp
• moonbug 5y ago
  and this is why insurance exists.
• epa 5y ago
  Chargebacks are still a huge issue for internet companies, can Web3 solve this?
• Jansen312 5y ago
  Lawyer up.
• knodi 5y ago
  Tell them to get bent.
• honkycat 5y ago
  You are going to continue working with upwork after costing you 10% of your income and doing nothing to help you?? After they garnish your wages and make you work for free for two months?!? And all because you didn't use their idiotic time entry system? Why?? Hang it up, dude. Surely they have competition your could switch to. Or get a normal 9-5.
• yawaworht1978 5y ago
  It's crazy how Airbnb, amazon and this company don't care if the card holder and the user account holder are the same. I work in finance and this is often a total no go in many industries , even with consent of the card holder. But going strict on this will cause friction I suppose, just like CVV codes aren't mandatory on transactions, so some companies leave them out of the payment process. It only helps a bit during a charge back defense to have CVV and 2fa enabled. I have read about other dodgy things that Upwork has done before, nasty bunch. Predictably, this outcry will make them "rethink" their position on this one case and they will "apologize" and most likely not update the KYC checks and carry on as usual.
• pictur 5y ago
  Please stop relying on this stupid site. These stupid sites that make money by ignoring people's efforts should be buried in history.
• jappwilson 5y ago
  In this particular case, payment in crypto via an escrow contract might be a better idea for freelance work in crypto. And by crypto I mean the person can be paid in a stable coin.
• 999900000999 5y ago
  >It was perfect. I even met Robin in real life in Zurich, instead of virtually. We continued working via Upwork while locating in Zurich, as to not violate any Upwork terms. At this level of trust, you should establish a direct relationship with the client. However, even if Robin started PayPaling him directly, Robin could still file a charge back. Robin knows exactly what he did, he just doesn't care. But at least then you don't have 20% being skimmed off top. I found all my contractors ( aside from Fiver, but these are 100, 200$ gigs) via doing my own research. I've wasted at least a thousand on work that wasn't really good. But the stuff that is usable, is fantastic. Anyway, OP is still on Upwork, so why's he complaining. If I worked somewhere and then randomly asked me to give 4 months pay back, I'm out.
• stanrivers 5y ago
  I would call Robin again and put this all back on them. In short, they stole money from someone else. They are the one that needs to payback Upwork or the card owner...
• otterley 5y ago
  The contract with Upwork states quite clearly that this could happen: “In addition, notwithstanding any other provision of the Terms of Service or the Escrow Instructions and to the extent permitted by applicable law, we reserve the right to seek reimbursement from you, and you will reimburse us, if we: (i) suspect fraud or criminal activity associated with your payment, withdrawal, or Project; (ii) discover erroneous or duplicate transactions; or (iii) have supplied our services in accordance with this Agreement yet we receive any chargeback from the Payment Method used by you, or used by your Client if you are a Freelancer, despite our provision of the Site Services in accordance with this Agreement. You agree that we have the right to obtain such reimbursement by instructing Upwork Escrow to (and Upwork Escrow will have the right to) charge the applicable Escrow Account, and any other accounts you hold with us, offsetting any amounts determined to be owing, deducting amounts from future payments or withdrawals, charging your Payment Method, or obtaining reimbursement from you by any other lawful means. If we are unable to obtain such reimbursement, we may, in addition to any other remedies available under applicable law, temporarily or permanently revoke your access to the Site and Site Services and close your Account.” Upwork is clearly by its own terms not an insurer against payment fraud or unauthorized credit card use. And the writer would have the same problem if he accepted CC payments directly: His own financial institution would debit his account for the chargeback and I’m not sure he would have any recourse against his bank. The anger expressed in the comments here is understandable, and demonstrates empathy for the poor fellow. But to increase overall trust in the system, generally payment mechanisms are biased toward cardholder protection instead of seller protection. As consumers I think we prefer things that way — especially if you ever find yourself an unwitting victim of a identify theft or a stolen payment card.
  • IAmPym 5y ago
    Companies need to acknowledge the flow of information is limited. We are in a period of humanity where people CANNOT know all the little details. You don't get to create a system and not take responsibility for the problems it causes using law as a safety net and expect it to scale. That is morally wrong Yes people have a responsibility to learn more, but the company has a responsibility to protect the people it interacts with
• TheSocialAndrew 5y ago
  It is the same with Airbnb. The platform does not allow you to perform your own guest verification, there isn't any fraud detection score that you can see (like Stripe Atlas would have), and worst of all the full name on the account can be changed at any time without additional verification. So as a guest you could create an account on someone else's name and book using their card, then change the name to match your ID before checking in (in case the host does ask for an ID) and you're all set. When this happens and typically some time after the guest completed their stay, you receive an email from Airbnb saying "Problem collecting payment for reservation [XXX]" that explains how Airbnb will do their best to collect payment but they are not obligated to. Basically these are platforms that will give you no choice in payment processing, but will also take no responsibility when it comes to fraud, nor give you any tools to fight fraud.
• account-5 5y ago
  Taking the article at face value my take is: 1. Upwork connected the client and freelancer. 2. The client used someone else's money/credit to pay the freelancer. 3. The fraud was found out and the money refunded. This, then, IMO is between the client, Upwork, and the police. Nothing to do with the freelancer. They are a victim in this fraud as well. Upwork have no right to demand money from the freelancer, their platform allowed the fraud, they're liable.
• timmit 5y ago
  I can't believe it, it doesn't make any sense to me, can u have a dispute with all these emails?
• throwawayboise 5y ago
  This is part of the risk of being a contractor/freelancer. If you want the maximum legal protections around getting paid for your work, you need to be an employee. Beyond that, ultimately it boils down to Robin has not paid for the work performed. The freelancer needs to demand payment from Robin directly, and if he won't pay, file a lawsuit against him if Upwork is not going to help. Will be difficult with Robin apparently being in a different country, and probably not worth it for only $12k, the legal fees and time spent will certainly exceed that amount. Charge it off as a lesson learned, and a 12k business loss on your taxes.
• ummonk 5y ago
  "I could’ve easily gotten paid from Robin outside of Upwork. Heck, he was physically in front of me." - I don't think that would have been relevant. He could have still committed credit card or check fraud. The main issue here seems to be that Upwork isn't meeting its end of the bargain in exchange for the cut that they take - given all sides agree that the worked hours weren't fraudulent, Upwork should do what they would have done had time been tracked in the tool, and they should be providing protection to the worker and pursuing collections from Robin themselves (and eating the loss until they can recover the unpaid balance). The human rights complaint in the article is rather weird though - Upwork isn't forcing him to work any extra - he could quit the platform today if he likes.
  • sumedh 5y ago
    > He could have still committed credit card or check fraud. but if the freelancer is directly accepting credit card payments he will see the name on the card and he can ask questions if the name is different.
• johnnyApplePRNG 5y ago
  Upwork hooked up the two parties, expecting to take a cut of the payments between them. One party did their fair share, the other party did not. Seems pretty cut and dry this is Upwork's problem to solve, not the party who did the work. However upwork allows workers to record their completed work is irrelevant.
• annoyingnoob 5y ago
  All roads point to Robin in this case. Gather the demands from Upwork and present them with a letter and a bill to Robin. If Robin does not pay then its time to lawyer up.
• ricardobayes 5y ago
  How can a bank initiate a chargeback after 2 years? I thought it was 90 days at most.
• ricardobayes 5y ago
  Different time tracking methods shouldn't carry financial risk. That's absurd and stupid.
• mianos 5y ago
  As much as this may not be a good example as there are so many red flags. A lot of these disruption startups are taking a standard business and pretending they don't have to have the same risks and control processes in place that traditional business have had to pay for, as a participant. It reminds me of Paypal. When they first started, it was simple, not too expensive, but often ignored the consumer protection laws in the countries, and states, they operated in. Over time they have been forced to provide the same rights and implement the same regulation local market participants have to. In doing so they have had to raise price to the point where they are just another, now more expensive, player, with a good marketing name. The bad part is, if you got on the wrong side of them in the early days, you lost your money and rights. These subcontracting companies are the same. By avoiding rights and regulation they can provide cheaper service. They can't do this forever.
• AlbertCory 5y ago
  It's much simpler than most of this thread makes it out to be, and I think this is what Judge Judy would ask: 1) Does the freelancer have the ability to verify the client's credit card? For example, can it tell Upwork "assume all responsibility for fraud from this point forward" if that is not the normal default? 2) If no, but Upwork does have that ability, then Upwork is responsible for fraud. 3) If Upwork still insists on its current arrangement, does it disclose this scenario's possibility to the freelancer? I don't mean "implied by the fine print, but upfront, in a way that can't be missed"? 4) If no, then again, Upwork is responsible for the fraud.
• imwillofficial 5y ago
  Sounds like an upwork problem.
• nhoughto 5y ago
  Since when can you chargeback after 2 years? I thought it was limited to a couple of months?
  • CRConrad 5y ago
    I think the freelancer did much more than $12,500 worth of work for "Robin" over those two years. The duration and content of the whole project is told just as backstory, to illustrate that the freelancer had no reason to suspect "Robin" before this backcharge popped up. The $12,500 is just the amount the cardholder could backcharge -- as you say, in the last few months -- which is probably a rather small part of the whole.
• xiaodai 5y ago
  upwork should borne the losses
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• hammyhavoc 5y ago
  Not your mom, not your milk. Not your platform, not your problem.
• NoblePublius 5y ago
  You used Upwork as your credit card processor. Then the processor told you that your customer was basically using a stolen credit card. It’s completely reasonable for Upwork to take these funds back from you. And it’s completely reasonable for you to call “Robin” and demand he pay you back directly.
  • CRConrad 5y ago
    Seems you got pretty much every single detail of this wrong. > You used Upwork as your credit card processor. No, he used Upwork as his agent for selling freelance work. Upwork in turn used whatever credit card processor they used; perhaps their bank, I don't know. > Then the processor told you that your customer was basically using a stolen credit card. No: Then Upwork's credit card processor told Upwork that Upwork's customer was basically using a stolen credit card. > It’s completely reasonable for Upwork to take these funds back from you. No: It’s completely reasonable for Upwork to take these funds back from Upwork's customer, "Robin". > And it’s completely reasonable for you to call “Robin” and demand he pay you back directly. No.
• educaysean 5y ago
  Upwork is a red herring in this case. As frustrating as it may be that Upwork wasn't more helpful in resolving this case, the current state of affairs is as follows: 1. The author (freelancer) did $12.5k amount of work that he wasn't compensated for 2. The owner of the CC that was "accidentally" charged $12.5k received all their money back through bank dispute 3. Upwork was able to claim their cut for the $12.5k worth of transaction that occurred between the author and Robin 4. Robin received $12.5k amount of work without paying a dime Robin needs to pay the author back the $12.5k he is owed. If Upwork isn't willing to help reclaim the debt, he needs to sue Robin directly for the amount. It's very strange how much good will the author is willing to show towards Robin given how Robin is the only entity in the story who got away with all the spoils without paying a thing.
  • vorpalhex 5y ago
    Upwork is the merchant of record. Robin did, fraudalantly pay - to Upwork. Upwork took their cut, and paid out to the freelancer. Upwork discovers Robin's fraud. Guess what? This is why upwork gets a 30% cut. Upwork gets to deal with that.
• voakbasda 5y ago
  Regardless of who is right or wrong, this situation convinces me that using Upwork does not seem like a good idea. I had already been put off by their spyware, but this kind of situation should never have escalated like this if Upwork actually valued its freelancers. Clearly, they value the people that write the checks more than those who cash them, so why would I ever trust them to represent my interests? They will resolve any conflict of interest in favor of their own profits.
• cultofmetatron 5y ago
  since multiple people have been affected by this (per the author) seems perfect for a lawyer to take it on as a class action lawsuit
• kjs3 5y ago
  How is "no" not the right answer?
• benburton 5y ago
  Never use Upwork? Got it. Thanks.
• dagaci 5y ago
  Upwork seems to be a haven for scammers to get work done for free. If someone has stolen money and made purchases (which is generally the purpose of theft), then recovery procedure should be with law enforcement. That will be the police. Of course this takes time and effort, so what you are expericing is a company trying to shortcut the process and leave you holding the bag.
• phibz 5y ago
  Why isn't Robin stepping in and fixing their mistake? They should cover the misappropriated funds. Not Upwork and not the author.
• democracy 5y ago
  Use upwork to find a lawyer - and if you lose, you can do a chargeback and get your expenses back )))
• brentis 5y ago
  Onus is on Upwork. They charge a fee on payment and as such are responsible for ensuring payment integrity. Issue is they could be heavy handed on your future success much like Apps on Apple. Best of luck.
• dusted 5y ago
  This seems to be an issue between upwork and the fraudster.
• CyanDeparture 5y ago
  I appreciate the subtle joke in here, Robin has been robbing him.
• ralferoo 5y ago
  I find it very puzzling that this guy is choosing to work 230 hours for free, especially considering that he has zero guarantees that he will ever get that money back or this exact same scenario wouldn't happen again. As others have noticed, the site takes a 20% fee, which is reasonable if it provides protection in problem situations like this. But if they immediately demand the worker to repay all their income, it's hard to see how they can even justify this 20% fee which is higher than any standard introduction fee in the recruitment sector. If it was me, I'd immediately stop using the website and get a lawyer involved. From the article, it's clear the client has admitted the work was done and used a credit card that wasn't theirs. So, at that point either the client has committed a fraud using someone else's card without permission, or was given permission to use the card in the past, in which case it's the cardowner's problem and up to them to sue the client for the money. Whichever, it's not their author's responsibility. So, for him to continue using the site, he must think that the potential future income would cover the lost 230 hours work, which itself seems suspect, as that represents about 1.5 months. He'd have to increase his rate significantly to make that back, so his best option is to find contracts elsewhere.
• whatthen 5y ago
  Your work is not valuable to them?! Only thing that matters is their profit and bank profit, on the other hand they would not exist without freelancers. If they don’t value work of their users, I’m afraid you should switch the platform and sue them for this insult.
• Firfi 5y ago
• Firfi 5y ago
  Can you offer them to pay with your unused connects thought? They seem to regard them very high!