(Topic ID: 108377)

The Official Pinside Kevin Kulek Skit-B Predator Discussion


By Xerico

4 years ago



Topic Stats

  • 18,299 posts
  • 815 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 1 day ago by Roostking
  • Topic is favorited by 193 Pinsiders

You

Linked Games

Topic Gallery

There have been 1,543 images uploaded to this topic. (View topic image gallery).

pirateplayersclub (resized).jpg
case against keith.pdf (PDF preview)
_2_16-21030.pdf (PDF preview)
Kulek.pdf (PDF preview)
6-pennywise-has-some-nickelback-funny-meme (resized).jpg
will-ferrell-fillwerrel-i-just-fell-down-the-stairs-holding-31512906 (resized).png
pinsiders (resized).jpg
pasted_image (resized).png
194b3475e0440b8112afc0ac4ad5bf0ed0e8ec3db63fb4b6748a4f2e06a9865b (resized).jpg
31A053C2-4495-4E3E-980F-E5ADEA02F1DE (resized).jpeg
IMG_2933 (resized).JPG
beetlejuice-shrunken head (resized).jpg
2716720260_bc8966f6b1 (resized).jpg
D460F55E-AD42-43C6-91EB-B8162A84A094.gif
Screenshot_20190103-214734_Facebook (resized).jpg
Screenshot_20181108-174321 (resized).png

Topic index (key posts)

86 key posts have been marked in this topic, showing the first 20 (Show topic index)

There are 18299 posts in this topic. You are on page 259 of 366.
#12901 2 years ago

Id be damn curious as to who was in AG,
If anyone feels comfortable to pm me.

#12902 2 years ago

It's been repeatedly inferred here that Stern was indeed part of the group.

#12903 2 years ago
Quoted from Razorbak86:

The reach-back period for preferential transfers to ordinary creditors (i.e., non-insiders) is 90 days prior to the date that the bankruptcy petition was filed, so any refunds received by the so-called Anonymous Group ("AG") were well outside of the reach-back period by the time Kulek filed Chapter 7.
The reach-back period for preferential transfers to "insiders" of a debtor (e.g., family member, partner) is 1 year pre-petition. For fraudulent conveyances, it is 2+ years.

Should not the lawyer working for the Pinsiders that retained him be looking into this angle? A Fox rep should be deposed to determine what information was brought to them, and who made that contact. Wouldn't that be a pip of info...

That could easily put those slippery eels, that received refunds, into the group of insiders. If that happens, they would be liable to pay back the bankruptcy trust due to the 1 year vs 90 day classification.

#12904 2 years ago
Quoted from Firebaall:

Should not the lawyer working for the Pinsiders that retained him be looking into this angle? A Fox rep should be deposed to determine what information was brought to them, and who made that contact. Wouldn't that be a pip of info...
That could easily put those slippery eels, that received refunds, into the group of insiders. If that happens, they would be liable to pay back the bankruptcy trust due to the 1 year vs 90 day classification.

I just got caught up reading this thread I promised myself to stay away from.

You (and Vid) are making way too much sense. Please stop.

#12905 2 years ago

Yikes, the next time I get the inside scoop that a bunch of pinheads are getting scammed the threat of legal action from those scammed when you tell anybody will totally make me come forward!

Talk about a lose lose situation...

#12906 2 years ago
Quoted from BC_Gambit:

Yikes, the next time I get the inside scoop that a bunch of pinheads are getting scammed the threat of legal action from those scammed when you tell anybody will totally make me come forward!
Talk about a lose lose situation...

No kidding. Ben Heck's comments a couple pages back still ring the most true.

#12907 2 years ago

Nobody would have to fear paying back the trust that didn't deserve action against them.

If those involved with the "AG" got identified from investigating Fox, and had to compensate for their actions, THAT would be a service to the pinball community. Right now, there is money that can be added to the pot (from those that sound like they abused their knowledge).

#12908 2 years ago
Quoted from Firebaall:

Should not the lawyer working for the Pinsiders that retained him be looking into this angle? A Fox rep should be deposed to determine what information was brought to them, and who made that contact. Wouldn't that be a pip of info...
That could easily put those slippery eels, that received refunds, into the group of insiders. If that happens, they would be liable to pay back the bankruptcy trust due to the 1 year vs 90 day classification.

Any deposits were likely refunded outside of the 1-year reach-back period, based on the dates below...

1] Kevin W. Kulek files Chapter 7: June 3, 2016

2] Pinball News Article: "PREDATOR PINBALL: THE INSIDE STORY," April 14, 2015

http://www.pinballnews.com/comment/predatorpinball2.html

3] Pinball News Article: "PREDATOR PINBALL: THE SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH," March 22, 2015

http://www.pinballnews.com/comment/predatorpinball.html

4] Anonymous Group investigation: October 2014 - March 2015

https://predatorpinball.wordpress.com

-1
#12909 2 years ago
Quoted from Razorbak86:

4] Anonymous Group investigation: October 2014 - March 2015
https://predatorpinball.wordpress.com

Well, here's the issue then...

By slowly leaking out the information: "to key members of the hobby and selected Pinsiders (mainly trusted & respected Immortals, as well as Moderators, etc)."

They created a situation of insider information that stretches a lot further, and makes MANY others liable under that 1 year limitation. That would lead to the question, "Were there any refunds made between June 3, 2015 - June 3, 2016?". If so, Each of those is subject to inspection. Interviewing the Fox rep is required here to discover the identity of the "AG" contact. I'd also be curious as to which Moderators were given this information...because if that is true, that's a concern as well.

There's so much blood lust going after Kevin, that people seem willing to turn a blind eye to the people that are also liable.

#12910 2 years ago
Quoted from Firebaall:

By slowly leaking out the information: "to key members of the hobby and selected Pinsiders (mainly trusted & respected Immortals, as well as Moderators, etc)."

Just to briefly address this, not one of the moderators who ordered Predator got any of their money out before the shit hit the fan (and a high percentage of us were preorders...). We still do not know who anonymous was (we obviously have our various suspicions as to who it possibly was as everyone does - but we have no proof), we (collectively) were caught just as off guard as anyone.

The whole anonymous is formed of pinside Immortals and Moderators statement they made when they broke the news was certainly not true as to the mod team. Just a toss off statement designed to confuse at the time.

#12911 2 years ago
Quoted from Firebaall:

"Were there any refunds made between June 3, 2015 - June 3, 2016?"

Only refunds from people's respective credit card companies or banks as far as I know during that time. To my knowledge Kevin did not process a single refund after the news broke (refunds from people's own credit card company or bank would not be subject to recoupment from the bankruptcy trustee under any circumstance I can think of).

#12912 2 years ago
Quoted from TigerLaw:

Kevin did not process a single refund after the news broke

This is true.

Just one clarification, Kevin (assume it was him) did try to issue a refund through paypal to the first X number of buyers after the shit really hit the fan. The next day the transaction was reversed, apparently after he got council.

#12913 2 years ago

Kevin did "try" some kind of a panicked refund from PayPal after the total collapse and everyone requested a refund. Victims received a notice that money was returned. Not sure if the money was not there, locked down or just Kevin doing a stall tactic. But they went to access it there was no money there. So the victim went from feeling like crap to getting a bit of hope and back to feeling shafted again.

Did anyone ever figure out what that was?

Edit (I type too slow)

#12914 2 years ago
Quoted from TigerLaw:

The whole anonymous is formed of pinside Immortals and Moderators statement they made when they broke the news was certainly not true as to the mod team. Just a toss off statement designed to confuse at the time.

Which is why I was careful to add "if true". That's also not quoted quite right. They didn't say that it was "formed of"....it was "informed". What you said changes the meaning a lot.

It doesn't change the opportunity to get Fox on the record, I'd like to hear it. Saying there were no refunds during that period is just hearsay. There's a lot of layers to this onion. At the end, I'm half expecting a Scooby Doo ending, with a rubber mask being pulled off and Gary Stern stern saying "And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids".

#12915 2 years ago
Quoted from Taxman:

Kevin did "try" some kind of a panicked refund from PayPal after the total collapse and everyone requested a refund.

He had spoken in the past about Paypal being a "partner" (the post is somewhere here on Pinside) and that the money was "safe".

When I requested a refund in 2014, it took him a week or 2 to get Paypal to refund it. At the time I was speaking with a few other pinsiders who were also requesting refunds, and it was the same process, a couple of weeks. This struck me as odd at the time, because Paypal refunds are normally instant.

In hindsight, with what we know today, i suspect that Paypal had frozen his account early on, and worked out some kind of arrangement with him to drip out the money, but hold onto the lion's share in case of fraud. When he attempted the refunds, Paypal probably permanently froze the money because of the credit card chargebacks that would have been flying fast and furious at the same time.

How much Paypal froze is still unknown.

#12916 2 years ago

Here was the "odd" Paypal post:

https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/a-few-words-from-skit-b-pinball/page/2#post-2076923

We have been working very closely with PayPal for a long time to make sure that every penny that goes through us is well-protected and secure. They have been extremely helpful and have developed a strong personal rapport with us that affords us the luxury of open and direct communication in any and all situations. With the security of all funds being absolutely paramount in ANY foreseeable case, there are processes that must be followed and while they can take a bit of time to work with, the end result is that even if we were to literally die or encounter a license issue or disappear to Venezuela or whatever other rumors there may be, we do so without risking a cent of your money.

#12917 2 years ago

Following that train of thought.... what would the legal status be of any money Paypal had frozen that wasn't refunded by credit card chargeback, or previously withdrawn by Kevin? There might be money still sitting somewhere. I guess the only person who knows the answer to that is Kevin.

15
#12918 2 years ago
Quoted from frolic:

He had spoken in the past about Paypal being a "partner" (the post is somewhere here on Pinside) and that the money was "safe".
When I requested a refund in 2014, it took him a week or 2 to get Paypal to refund it. At the time I was speaking with a few other pinsiders who were also requesting refunds, and it was the same process, a couple of weeks. This struck me as odd at the time, because Paypal refunds are normally instant.
In hindsight, with what we know today, i suspect that Paypal had frozen his account early on, and worked out some kind of arrangement with him to drip out the money, but hold onto the lion's share in case of fraud. When he attempted the refunds, Paypal probably permanently froze the money because of the credit card chargebacks that would have been flying fast and furious at the same time.
How much Paypal froze is still unknown.

When I was chasing Kulek's accounts I consulted with PayPal. Kulek said that they were acting as an escrow agent and holding the funds. He even told the magistrate in my small claims suit this. Well, when I consulted with PayPal Legal they said oh hell no. They NEVER act as an escrow agent. Other third parties can do that, but they are simply a transaction processor. So, Kulek lied his ass off from the very beginning. His statements about arrangements with PayPal was simply a slight of hand diversion.

#12919 2 years ago
Quoted from frolic:

I guess the only person who knows the answer to that is Kevin.

And Paypal.

Has the Pinside group's lawyer investigated Paypal? Seems there's a huge amount of sniffing that isn't happening. Paypal: "oh, here's all the money. Nobody asked us!"...

#12920 2 years ago

When I look back at this video, it sends shivers down my spine...

#12921 2 years ago

PayPal was looked at a long time ago.
Kevin lied about PayPal.

#12922 2 years ago
Quoted from Enaud:

Well, when I consulted with PayPal Legal they said oh hell no. They NEVER act as an escrow agent. Other third parties can do that, but they are simply a transaction processor.

The only thing is Paypal is well known to freeze money. Happens all the time.

Found this story quickly of Paypal holding money for a product and then dispensing drips of money:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Entrepreneur/comments/1rkkd7/paypal_just_froze_over_70000_in_my_account_say/

In this particular case, I'm apt not to take Paypal at their word. The above link completely refutes what they told you, and there are more stories like it.

#12923 2 years ago

IIRC Pal pay was served. They complied.
If there was money left in pp account Kevin wouldn't of have money to
Buy a house, trailer and a long list of other toys.

#12924 2 years ago

PayPal are lying thieves! NEVER trust them at any time for any reason. Do so at your own financial peril.

#12925 2 years ago

PayPal will definitely hold money. They could hold millions of dollars if they wanted. Some larger accounts have rolling reserves, meaning depending on your credit score, type of business, etc. they could apply anywhere from 5% to 50% hold on every single incoming transaction. Typically the percentage is held for 90 days and then released. it is typically for accounts with a $100k+ a month rolling through, And if you all of a sudden have an influx of returns, claims, etc. It is basically a how they see fit hold.

#12926 2 years ago
Quoted from Trekie:

Kevin wouldn't of have money to
Buy a house, trailer

They are both one and the same thing where Kevin comes from.

rd

#12927 2 years ago
Quoted from vid1900:

Sharpe said last year that a top dollar license for a game was $20.
(WWE probably was $2, lol)

I always assumed WWE paid Stern to make it.

#12928 2 years ago
Quoted from Trekie:

PayPal was looked at a long time ago.
Kevin lied about PayPal.

Kevin lied about anything.
Now after watching the vid with respect of 2 years cool down time I can see it in his eyes.
He is lying from the first word onwards ....
At that time I didn't recognized it .... unfortunately

SkitB (resized).jpg

#12929 2 years ago

Spooky said in a podcast in the AMH era that they were going away from Paypal as well. One issue too many and PP was being a hindrance more than a convenience. I use them for small-ish stuff, but would hate to run a business through them.

#12930 2 years ago
Quoted from desertT1:

Spooky said in a podcast in the AMH era that they were going away from Paypal as well. One issue too many and PP was being a hindrance more than a convenience. I use them for small-ish stuff, but would hate to run a business through them.

Exactly. Here in North America, small businesses should use Costco for cc transactions.

#12931 2 years ago

quick story about paypal - i bought a 55 bel air conv on ebay for 25k - seller wanted paypal - i said i would pay cash when i pick up the car - he insisted on paypal - i called paypal and they said the money would be guaranteed - i asked for something in writing - they wouldn't do it - i then called ebay and ebay sent me an email saying my 25k was guaranteed under their protection policy - so i sent the money. paypal lied and i only found out when i sked foor it in writing.

anyway i picked up the car near niagara falls and somebody from pinside or rgp met me there and i delieverd a family guy for free to him as he lived near there also.

i got the car and it was a great deal and wasn't a scam - i asked the guy (old man) why paypal and not cash - he had heard stories how people pay cash - take the car - and then have friends go rob the guy right after they leave with the car

moral of the story - paypal lies - ebay didn't lie - am i am one of these idiots who lost his money on predator if people wonder why i am posting in this thread

thanks ed

#12932 2 years ago
Quoted from Enaud:

When I was chasing Kulek's accounts I consulted with PayPal. Kulek said that they were acting as an escrow agent and holding the funds. He even told the magistrate in my small claims suit this. Well, when I consulted with PayPal Legal they said oh hell no. They NEVER act as an escrow agent. Other third parties can do that, but they are simply a transaction processor.

Yes, they aren't an escrow. They will hold funds... but to protect themselves.. not because they are acting as an escrow.

The whole bit from Kevin about Paypal and having some 'special arrangement' stunk from 100yrds away. Just more ammo in a criminal case IMO.

#12933 2 years ago
Quoted from edcianci:

quick story about paypal - i bought a 55 bel air conv on ebay for 25k - seller wanted paypal - i said i would pay cash when i pick up the car - he insisted on paypal - i called paypal and they said the money would be guaranteed - i asked for something in writing - they wouldn't do it - i then called ebay and ebay sent me an email saying my 25k was guaranteed under their protection policy - so i sent the money. paypal lied and i only found out when i sked foor it in writing.
anyway i picked up the car near niagara falls and somebody from pinside or rgp met me there and i delieverd a family guy for free to him as he lived near there also.
i got the car and it was a great deal and wasn't a scam - i asked the guy (old man) why paypal and not cash - he had heard stories how people pay cash - take the car - and then have friends go rob the guy right after they leave with the car
moral of the story - paypal lies - ebay didn't lie - am i am one of these idiots who lost his money on predator if people wonder why i am posting in this thread
thanks ed

Would love to see pictures of the '55!

#12934 2 years ago
Quoted from gearheaddropping:

Would love to see pictures of the '55!

here is a link to a pinside topic with a pcture of it - thanks ed

https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/pinside-car-club#post-3364123

15
#12935 2 years ago
Quoted from Firebaall:

Should not the lawyer working for the Pinsiders that retained him be looking into this angle? A Fox rep should be deposed to determine what information was brought to them, and who made that contact. Wouldn't that be a pip of info...
That could easily put those slippery eels, that received refunds, into the group of insiders. If that happens, they would be liable to pay back the bankruptcy trust due to the 1 year vs 90 day classification.

.

Quoted from Firebaall:

Well, here's the issue then...
By slowly leaking out the information: "to key members of the hobby and selected Pinsiders (mainly trusted & respected Immortals, as well as Moderators, etc)."
They created a situation of insider information that stretches a lot further, and makes MANY others liable under that 1 year limitation. That would lead to the question, "Were there any refunds made between June 3, 2015 - June 3, 2016?". If so, Each of those is subject to inspection. Interviewing the Fox rep is required here to discover the identity of the "AG" contact. I'd also be curious as to which Moderators were given this information...because if that is true, that's a concern as well.

This is not my area of law etc., but I bet that the attorney is not "looking into this angle" because your definition of being an "insider" is simply not accurate.

The AG obtained their information by doing their own homework. They obtained their information from outside sources, not from Kevin Kulek/Skit-B (or anyone inside the company and/or family of Kulek). The information that they obtained, could have been obtained by *anyone* .

I do not believe that people in their position had a fiduciary duty to come forward and share the information that they gathered on their own, again, from sources outside of Kevin/Skit-B.

So none of the pre-order depositors would be considered "insiders" pursuant to the Bankruptcy code, and those refunds are not preferential transfers.

#12936 2 years ago

"Insider", as it would apply to bankruptcy would be a stretch to blanket anybody outside of the 90 days before filing. Those that couldn't be directly tied as an associate, that is. I would agree with you on that.

I'm guessing that's why what's his name that bought the two machines got deposed, and specifically asked about ties/association with skitb.

#12937 2 years ago
Quoted from Toads:

When I look back at this video, it sends shivers down my spine...
» YouTube video

They're proudly wearing their "Shit mask" shirts....I'm amazed anyone sent them money after seeing that logo. If you spell "Skit" as "Shit" on your logo and don't see it....it's clear you have zero attention to detail.

#12938 2 years ago
Quoted from Firebaall:

I'm guessing that's why what's his name that bought the two machines got deposed, and specifically asked about ties/association with skitb.

Exactly.

-1
#12939 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

.

This is not my area of law etc., but I bet that the attorney is not "looking into this angle" because your definition of being an "insider" is simply not accurate.
The AG obtained their information by doing their own homework. They obtained their information from outside sources, not from Kevin Kulek/Skit-B (or anyone inside the company and/or family of Kulek). The information that they obtained, could have been obtained by *anyone* .
I do not believe that people in their position had a fiduciary duty to come forward and share the information that they gathered on their own, again, from sources outside of Kevin/Skit-B.
So none of the pre-order depositors would be considered "insiders" pursuant to the Bankruptcy code, and those refunds are not preferential transfers.

Along with Kevin, they are also pieces of shit. Pinball is supposed to be a tight knit group. They took care of themselves and fucked the other buyers. I have zero skin in this game other than it pisses me off these insiders could of helped their fellow pinball community but instead while our community was on fire they wouldn't even piss on them to put them out. Shame on them and the ass clown in the beanie.

#12940 2 years ago
Quoted from shovelhed:

. Shame on them and the ass clown in the beanie.

does he ever take that stupid thing off?

16
#12941 2 years ago
Quoted from shovelhed:

Pinball is supposed to be a tight knit group. They took care of themselves and fucked the other buyers.

I wouldn't say anybody that had nothing to do with the pimping of the game or exchange of other people's money in this ordeal fkd anyone.

It is each person's own responsibility to research what they are buying and who they are giving their money to.

#12942 2 years ago
Quoted from edcianci:

i asked the guy (old man) why paypal and not cash - he had heard stories how people pay cash - take the car - and then have friends go rob the guy right after they leave with the car

Somewhat similar story: bought a last action hero from a retired guy on ebay couple years back. Price was somewhat reasonable. Asked why he didn't just throw it on craigslist so he didn't have to pay fees. He said he trusts ebay because you have a contract of agreed pricing so he doesn't have to haggle with buyers, and each party has feedback (and registered info). He'd never let some stranger in his house nowadays.

#12943 2 years ago
Quoted from desertT1:

Spooky said in a podcast in the AMH era that they were going away from Paypal as well. One issue too many and PP was being a hindrance more than a convenience. I use them for small-ish stuff, but would hate to run a business through them.

It depends on the type of business you are. PayPal in general works well with small businesses and small purchases because that is what they were made for. With major, huge purchases, it sends up a bunch of red flags where they highly scrutinize everything. And honestly, it makes sense - if they didn't and people were transacting thousands of dollars of fraud through them, they would be on the hook.

For the pinball companies like Spooky, you suddenly have even 100 people submit $5,000 and you have $500,000 in your account overnight. That's enough to make PayPal sit up and take notice, which can include freezing your funds until they can research what you're doing and what caused people to pay you a half million in the first place.

As a business owner where most of our transactions are $100 or less, I appreciate that as PayPal fees are actually cheaper for us than paying for credit card fees because they ensure as much as possible is legit. If my stuff was getting frozen though, I'm positive I would feel otherwise...

Quoted from flynnibus:

Yes, they aren't an escrow. They will hold funds... but to protect themselves.. not because they are acting as an escrow.
The whole bit from Kevin about Paypal and having some 'special arrangement' stunk from 100yrds away. Just more ammo in a criminal case IMO.

Well, sort of.

I always assumed that Kevin meant he was holding the money he was paid via PayPal online in his PayPal account. You don't have to transfer it to yourself at all.

I guess in summary, ultimately PayPal isn't the problem here. Kevin is.

#12944 2 years ago
Quoted from goatdan:

and you have $500,000 in your account overnight. That's enough to make PayPal sit up and take notice, which can include freezing your funds until they can research what you're doing and what caused people to pay you a half million in the first place.

....and here is the ENTIRE problem with PayPus.

First why is it any of their business where you got the money and second please tell me ANY bank in the world that would behave like this - NONE, that's how many.

PayPus works well for trinkets bought on eBay and that's about it.

Actions like you describe are all too common and have sent honest and profitable businesses to the wall!

#12945 2 years ago

So....isn't there a warrant out? Seems like folks here have moved from wondering when it's going to be enforced to all trying to be interpreters of the law...

#12946 2 years ago
Quoted from Homepin:

....and here is the ENTIRE problem with PayPus.
First why is it any of their business where you got the money and second please tell me ANY bank in the world that would behave like this - NONE, that's how many.
PayPus works well for trinkets bought on eBay and that's about it.
Actions like you describe are all too common and have sent honest and profitable businesses to the wall!

We purposely avoided PayPal during our Shark Tank airing knowing that a lot of money could get frozen for a long period of time. No way would folks be willing to wait a few months to get their machine because the payment didn't clear. Square and Shopify had all of our money to us within 2 business days!

#12947 2 years ago
Quoted from Homepin:

First why is it any of their business where you got the money and second please tell me ANY bank in the world that would behave like this - NONE, that's how many.

PayPal behaves like it does because of the credit card rules that are out there. As I'm sure you know, if someone fraudulently transacts something with a credit card and buys an item from you, when the card is charged back, you lose the money. If you already shipped, you also lose the item. There is basically no recourse as a business.

If PayPal has $500k in transactions fraudulently transacted through them, not just do they lose $500k in chargebacks from the credit card companies, they also lose $500k that you took out of the company for your own purposes. Because they are a money transferring tool, and not a bank, they are extra liable for this.

Like I said, as a business that transacts small stuff through them (although PayPal has told us we are in their top 10% of companies that sell in the way of transactions, but I don't think we get near $100k in a year), it works well to have them protecting that. If I was like you and conducting significantly more business, I would despise them, absolutely.

In this case, I only despise Kevin.

#12948 2 years ago
Quoted from goatdan:

PayPal behaves like it does because of the credit card rules that are out there. As I'm sure you know, if someone fraudulently transacts something with a credit card and buys an item from you, when the card is charged back, you lose the money. If you already shipped, you also lose the item. There is basically no recourse as a business.

As a merchant tho you have an agreement with terms with the cc that give you protections if you follow the rules. With paypal you are at their whim when it comes to freezing funds and when they will release them. You also have paypal doing claw backs for THEIR buyer protection schemes (that benefit PayPal... not you).

In short... the relationship is all out of balance and it doesn't look so bad until you get fisted by them and learn how bad it can be.

#12949 2 years ago
Quoted from flynnibus:

As a merchant tho you have an agreement with terms with the cc that give you protections if you follow the rules.

Sort of - except that online, the majority of those protections do not apply to you. Since that's where PayPal operates, it makes sense.

I've been pretty majorly screwed by credit card companies before from online orders. Make no doubt about it - no transaction company cares about the company they are using. The credit card company actually makes money when fraud is transacted (they charge the company who had the fraud transacted against it charged a "fee" for the privilege) and they have very few tools to allow people to completely verify who they are online.

Honestly, both methods are crap for merchants. I've found that for small things, PayPal is easier to talk with and show proof than credit card companies. And we've dealt with both, and follow both of their rules quite extensively. With larger items, the credit card rules definitely do favor not-PayPal.

#12950 2 years ago
Quoted from NJGecko:

So....isn't there a warrant out? Seems like folks here have moved from wondering when it's going to be enforced to all trying to be interpreters of the law...

I wonder how much in penalties has accumulated now. One thing is certain, you can't bankrupt out of bankruptcy court imposed sanctions...though the judge could modify the amount later of course.

Promoted items from the Pinside Marketplace
From: $ 18.00
Apparel - Men
Pinside Shop
$ 6.00
Electronics
Yorktown Parts and Equip
$ 334.95
$ 3.00
Cabinet Parts
BK Pinball
From: $ 19.99
$ 25.00
Cabinet - Other
Filament Printing
$ 18.99
Eproms
Matt's Basement Arcade
$ 149.00
$ 87.95
Cabinet - Shooter Rods
Super Skill Shot Shop
From: $ 42.00
Cabinet - Shooter Rods
ModFather Pinball Mods
$ 29.95
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
ULEKstore
From: $ 19.50
Apparel - Unisex
ArcadeMade
$ 48.00
Cabinet - Other
ModFather Pinball Mods
$ 87.00
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
Lermods
$ 2,000.00
Pinball Machine
Great American Pinball
$ 20.00
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
3D MODS
$ 159.99
Lighting - Other
Lighted Pinball Mods
$ 29.99
Cabinet - Sound/Speakers
Lighted Pinball Mods
$ 49.00
$ 18.99
Eproms
Matt's Basement Arcade
$ 19.95
There are 18299 posts in this topic. You are on page 259 of 366.

Hey there! Got a moment?

Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run thanks to donations from our visitors? Please donate to Pinside, support the site and get anext to your username to show for it! Donate to Pinside