2 ms·

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 I

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
- otterley 5y ago
  > 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. But that’s exactly what we have achieved. Contracts of adhesion, unfair as they seem to some, significantly lower transactional costs by eliminating negotiation and have allowed us to scale commerce tremendously as a result. To balance out the bad parts of adhesive contracts, we guard against moral hazard by providing fraud protection against innocent cardholders. We also make certain particularly immoral or unfair terms in contracts unlawful as a matter of law, such as disclaiming liability for inherently dangerous activities, or using one’s child as consideration.

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

otterley 5y ago
> 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. But that’s exactly what we have achieved. Contracts of adhesion, unfair as they seem to some, significantly lower transactional costs by eliminating negotiation and have allowed us to scale commerce tremendously as a result. To balance out the bad parts of adhesive contracts, we guard against moral hazard by providing fraud protection against innocent cardholders. We also make certain particularly immoral or unfair terms in contracts unlawful as a matter of law, such as disclaiming liability for inherently dangerous activities, or using one’s child as consideration.