paypal refusing refund to a "troll" who donated 50k to twitch streamers

[Sandraudiga]

iNexus_Ninja "anthony" topic below


a quote from australian federal government agency when they sued valve for refusing refunds to australians

for my self i was refused a $181 refund when my iphone case was not delivered from ebay then i was banned from paypal for "asking for too many refunds" so i reported them to accc who told me they offically logged it but i would need to go after paypal my self

similar situation here with anthony
regardless of why he spend 50k if he disliked their videos as a reason for "product has a fault" since the product he spent 50k on was twitch streamer videos
it is illegal for paypal to refuse refunds to australian citizens


accc would take more notice to his 50k loss from paypal than my $181 he needs to report them to accc (i told him on twitch)

He was not refunded because he got what he paid for. It was a donation for streamed content, and he donated to them many times and basked in the twitch chat glory. Trying to get a refund a month after trolling them isn't a legitimate refund case.

[Ulfric Trumpcloak]

I've never used paypal, never will. The douchebag deserved it though, from what i've heard streamers have to pay taxes on donations even when they're refunded, so f that guy.

[The Stormbringer]

Moronic troll decides to donate a crap-ton of money to relatively low key streamers, getting them super happy and their hopes up like crazy before trying to get a refund to fuck with them and make them miserable (and possibly go into debt if they'd already spent it). Paypal alerts the streamers of this and they contest it. Paypal sides with the streamers and decides it isn't going to reward the little shit for being an asshole, instead teaching him (and potentially his parents) a valuable lesson in the process.

This, to me, is justice served.

[D3cadent]

dyslexia can similate old age when reading as well
go to a doctor get your self checked
fish oil and krill oil after usually 3 week use you will notice an improvement

No, in this case he's right. You can't write for shit. You haven't explained, at all, why he should get a refund.

You can't just throw around references to the ACCC thinking it means something.

[Mormolyce]

I wish credit card companies wouldn't honour these kinds of chargebacks frankly.

Story is fake, on his twitter it's confirmed there were no chargebacks.

He's apparently very good at blackjack, so the money is his own.

Are you saying au.yahoo.com would lie to us!!??

[Sunseeker]

If he can demonstrate that there was a legitimate, serious flaw with the product, or the product was not delivered (in this case, I suppose the Stream) then he is justified. But he'd going to have to demonstrate more than "I don't like it."

[Toijin]

regardless of why he spend 50k if he disliked their videos as a reason for "product has a fault" since the product he spent 50k on was twitch streamer videos
it is illegal for paypal to refuse refunds to australian citizens

That's the thing however, PayPal doesn't refuse refunds in general, but they do have specific terms and conditions outlining when and how a refund can be performed. Source So it would not be a breach of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 as PayPal does have return policy, and is not "refusing refunds under any circumstances".

The ACL under Schedule 2 Section 18 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (formerly known as TPA s52) is the provision which initially brought forward the issue of businesses indicating "no refunds under any circumstances" as in such a scenario would be making false or misleading representations of the goods and services. PayPal does have a refund policy and a refund procedure, so they are not making a misleading representation of their service. Source

The goods or services being fit for purpose is where the 'fault' bit comes in, whereby the product or service must be of an acceptable quality fit for that purpose. For this Twitch Troll, Section 61 of the CCA states that the Consumer Law protections have a guarantee to the service provided are to be fit for a particular purpose, in this case - viewing twitch streams is not a

"product has a fault"

as you claim. Disliking the videos isn't sufficient reason for the service to not be fit for it's particular purpose.

"i changed my mind" usually has been enough for me when i made a mistake purchasing something

Changing your mind isn't sufficient justification for a refund. Source Perhaps if the business has a refund policy in good faith allowing you a refund, but they are under no legal obligation to do so unless if the product or service is faulty etc. as covered under the CCA.

Endus also explained why you can't just initiate a chargeback, or doing so would be chargeback fraud.

If that's your justification for a chargeback, you're commitiing fraud. Chargeback fraud, specifically. It's not just another way to cancel your order. What you're doing with a chargeback is saying that the charge wasn't authorized, or you were the victim of some kind of fraud.

[Soeroah]

If he can demonstrate that there was a legitimate, serious flaw with the product, or the product was not delivered (in this case, I suppose the Stream) then he is justified. But he'd going to have to demonstrate more than "I don't like it."

Particularly because he wasn't purchasing a product, he was donating to a free-to-view product, which is generally accepted as being what someone does of their own will.

[melodramocracy]

If the story is true, he absolutely deserves to lose his money.

On the other hand, Paypal and their fees can EABOD.

[Sunseeker]

Particularly because he wasn't purchasing a product, he was donating to a free-to-view product, which is generally accepted as being what someone does of their own will.

Exactly, he was donating he wasn't paying for a specific product, there was no agreed-upon provision of goods or services for this money. It was a "gift", no you shouldn't get a refund for a "gift".

[skannerz22]

=What you're doing with a chargeback is saying that the charge wasn't authorized, or you were the victim of some kind of fraud.

i did not say that i did that

when ever i said something wasn't autherised i was not lying i am not comiting fraud and never have hense why i am still here talking to you from dads home and not a jail cell -.- please fix your logic sir
such as two days ago i contacted ing direct because i found "playstationnetwork" 2 charges on my card i don't own a playstation..therefor it's unautherised i have no idea what it is from i am not "changing my mind" and ing direct wasn't able to see what it was from either all they saw was "playstationnetwork" just like i did

you're getting stuff mixed up
i haven't ever committed fraud i wouldn't be here talking to you if i had
i am however a victim of fraud a bunch of times when i used paypal.. that battery iphone case was just 1 time out of the many
and other times i have had to get my card replaced as part of the refund policy when i found unautherised charges on my card (such as that "playstationnetwork")

if you want to talk about fraud however
multiple times ebay sellers would only refund you if you give them good feedback
my product was broken(a lot of the time) and they only refund without broken product returned if you give good feedback
they're not allowed to do that in ebay policy feedback manipulation but regardless i had a useless item i couldn't use and wanted my money back

i didn't lie with my refund requests
i just can't be bothered to return the broken item or i already tossed it in the bin
and yes a company refunds based on good faith i can't/be bothered return it to them they understood and gave a refund

the only fraud that happened was at the sellers end..and it was on ebay rather than that^^^ they would only refund if you helped them with good feedback despite they deserved 0 stars and negative
i was the victim of fraud..not them...
which is why i reported paypal to accc
accc said i would need to take them(paypal) to court my self i cbf doing that so all they did was log it into their database as paypal refusing refund

- - - Updated - - -

Exactly, he was donating he wasn't paying for a specific product, there was no agreed-upon provision of goods or services for this money. It was a "gift", no you shouldn't get a refund for a "gift".

it's been said already by someone else
he was a black jack expert and he wasn't trolling anyone with his parents money

[Soeroah]

it's been said already by someone else
he was a black jack expert and he wasn't trolling anyone with his parents money

That's immaterial to what you quoted.

Where the money came from isn't relevant, the fact of the matter is it was a donation, not a purchase, so by and large consumer protection wouldn't apply, unless he could prove he was misled as to where the donation was going (hint: Twitch streamers pocket the donations, they aren't lying about where the money will go like fake charities).

If anything, it being his money, not his parents, makes it even more unlikely there could be a refund. If it was his parents, they could possibly apply and say the transaction wasn't approved, and maybe something would happen. If it was his own money, he made a donation willingly. Intention to ask for it back down the road isn't covered by the ACCC's scope, and you can't use normal refund policies from Paypal on gifts.

[Pebrocks The Warlock]

it's been said already by someone else
he was a black jack expert and he wasn't trolling anyone with his parents money

https://twitter.com/iNexusNinia/with_replies

[Xar226]

regardless of why he spend 50k if he disliked their videos as a reason for "product has a fault" since the product he spent 50k on was twitch streamer videos

No. There is no "product" and he did not purchase anything. He made a donation.

I have a friend who is a very small Twitch streamer; we're talking like 30 viewers on average. He's absolutely paranoid to spend any donations until the (30 day?) window for refunds has closed, and it's because of asshats like this. I'm sorry this kid's parents have to pay for this, but maybe he'll learn a lesson about being a little shitbag.

[Sunseeker]

it's been said already by someone else
he was a black jack expert and he wasn't trolling anyone with his parents money

Who cares if he's a blackjack expert? The fuck does that have to do with anything?

So he's a thief, who should go to jail for ya know, theft.

[Endus]

i did not say that i did that

You explicitly said that you'd done chargebacks because "you'd changed your mind".

i didn't lie with my refund requests
i just can't be bothered to return the broken item or i already tossed it in the bin
and yes a company refunds based on good faith i can't/be bothered return it to them they understood and gave a refund

This is theft. It's one thing to return a product that's malfunctioning, it's quite another to throw it out and still demand your money back. That's theft.