Secured payments, consumer protection and buyer recourse...

[CYPER]

So what kind of protection will I have if I pay with a debit card through PayPal? 45 days only? (maybe longer as shown in this topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=266945.0)

I use a debit card for 2 reasons:
I don't own a credit card with such a large limit. I can apply for 2-3 extra CC but still that won't be enough. I doubt they will give me a CC with a limit that can cover a single Jupiter purchase.
Metro Bank debit card has absolutely no fees on foreign transactions or spending money overseas or in another currency. They just use the global MasterCard rate and that's it.

[CYPER]

In regards to interest on CC you can apply for one with interest free purchases or balances:

Interest free purchases CC: spend on it and just pay the minimum payment each month. Or divide what you owe by the interest free months and pay back that every month.
Interest free balance transfers CC: Spend on your regular CC and then transfer what you owe to this one paying a fixed fee. Some cards offer BT periods as long as 28 months

More information in Moneysavingexpert

[Bitcoinorama]

So what kind of protection will I have if I pay with a debit card through PayPal? 45 days only? (maybe longer as shown in this topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=266945.0)

I use a debit card for 2 reasons:
I don't own a credit card with such a large limit. I can apply for 2-3 extra CC but still that won't be enough. I doubt they will give me a CC with a limit that can cover a single Jupiter purchase.
Metro Bank debit card has absolutely no fees on foreign transactions or spending money overseas or in another currency. They just use the global MasterCard rate and that's it.

Debit you get Paypal's 45 days.

Credit Card issuers often offer longer. It all depends on the T&Cs your card issuing bank provides. Which is why you must call them prior in these instances.

Of course then there is individual country consumer protection laws respective of where you reside and where the company resides. Sweden for instance has a lot more in place than the US. These rules apply to any payment method as long as proof of purchase can be provided.

The countries individual laws are work in progress in this thread, which is why it can't be a closed thread. I believe in the US it varies state to state.

I know Metro Bank well. They are very fair, but their focus is sub-prime and convenience.

Barclay's have solid protection.

You can make payments individually, you don't have to make one large order, but check if your card issuer has a protection limit. I believe Section 75 stipulates a max of £30k in the UK.

[CYPER]

Well, my main CC have a limit of £2800.00 and I have another one that I haven't used in more than 3 years with a limit of £1000 (which I now is has expired). I guess I can apply for another 1-2 cards, but still that won't be enough for ordering a Jupiter and I don't think you can split one Jupiter into multiple orders/payments.

In regards to debit cards which bank do you think offers the best protection as I have accounts in 7 UK banks. By protection I mean if anything happens they will cooperate in finding a way of getting my money back.

[Bitcoinorama]

Well, my main CC have a limit of £2800.00 and I have another one that I haven't used in more than 3 years with a limit of £1000 (which I now is has expired). I guess I can apply for another 1-2 cards, but still that won't be enough for ordering a Jupiter and I don't think you can split one Jupiter into multiple orders/payments.

In regards to debit cards which bank do you think offers the best protection as I have accounts in 7 UK banks. By protection I mean if anything happens they will cooperate in finding a way of getting my money back.

Now I'm currently being accused of having ill-intentions, I want to be exceptionally clear I'm not encouraging a purchase for any company, and I definitely do not want you placing yourself in debt.

W.r.t. to which bank, it's hard to say as they all have differing levels of purchase protection dependant on what card they offer.

At a guess I'd say Barclays and Natwest are probably the most domiant. Barclay's platinum and Natwest Black ar very secure, but they may not be accessible to you. Amex is also very customer focused. With respect to limits you can always call and increase them if you have held the card for a while, just don't rack up debt.

Likewise, call explain the purchase and ask them specifically whether they cover you.

[kibblesnbits]

SUMMARY as it will be read by outsiders.

The bitcoin community should not use bitcoins for payments.

Yes the irony, oh the irony.  "I need to put a large amount of debt on my credit card so I can purchase a magical Bitcoin thingy.  Then I will make money to get out of my credit card debt."

[kibblesnbits]

SUMMARY as it will be read by outsiders.

The bitcoin community should not use bitcoins for payments.

Yes the irony, oh the irony.  "I need to put a large amount of debt on my credit card so I can purchase a magical Bitcoin thingy.  Then I will make money to get out of my credit card debt."

I always find it funny how individuals see credit cards as debt. If you had the cash anyways, using a credit card (At least for me) actually earns me at minimum a 1% cash back. So I actually make money using a card and it gets paid in full every month.

Then why bother with Bitcoin?

[Vigil]

I think this is all bad advice and the complete opposite of how the Bitcoin community should handle this situation. We cannot claim to want to eliminate the various bureaucracies and have a free-market and then turn around to run to them when things go wrong. We need to establish some market alternatives which address these issues.

[kibblesnbits]

I think this is all bad advice and the complete opposite of how the Bitcoin community should handle this situation. We cannot claim to want to eliminate the various bureaucracies and have a free-market and then turn around to run to them when things go wrong. We need to establish some market alternatives which address these issues.

Yes.  Escrow.  Full stop.

[Bitcoinorama]

Look I appreciate the irony in this, and the card aspect is only a part of the thread, the rest should be about consumer protection.

Fact is though I do not advocate debt ever, but with cash in front of me and how certain companies have abused Bitcoins, and the fact we are dealing unknowns would I rather use my card that I know covers me over a period of time for a safe payment, or escrow with parties unknown. Sorry, at this point in time I choose the former. It's easier for me to manage.

That said, everybody, everybody here rates JohnK, and I would likely go through him, but we've w yet to see how this Avalon situation unfolds, as certainly no one predicted this happening!

Anyway this thread also applies to consumer protection, so perhaps as the Avalon and BFL stories progress we'll be able to share more info...

[driksson]

Can peeps help advise w.r.t. US law? How is that affected state to state? I will update above with any succinct relevant material as and when it's shared below. Thanks!

Take note, swedish regulations differ B2C And B2B rights. If we as clients purchase a complete miner, its b2c. But if we only buy chips, its B2B company to company have different set of rules.
KonsumentVerket = The consumer Agency. Which only regulates the end client.

However if you have paid by card within the UK (and EU) at least;

Business to business sales, are consumer rights applicable?!

In short, yes, unless the company you are dealing with has specifically underwritten terms in their Terms and Conditions negating aspects of your consumer rights. This is known as an exclusion clause, and is yet another reason why Terms and Conditions should always be read and thoroughly discussed in your respective thread.

How do you know if the contract (business to business) takes away your statutory rights?

If the person who sold you the goods or services has taken away your statutory rights, there should be something in your contract about this. For example, it might say  the seller isn't responsible for goods that are unsatisfactory, don't match their description or aren't fit for purpose. Or it might say that the seller isn't responsible for any loss you've suffered because of their lack of care or skill. This type of content in a contract is called an exclusion clause.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/consumer_problems_with_business_to_business_services_e/consumer_protection_for_businesses.htm

This could be, but sweden has its own protection for the swedish consumers, to protect them. And it mostly only covers b2c inside sweden from what i know.

[warhawk187]

Thanks for the info that everyone here should know before they make a purchase. Can't believe you're now a 'shill' for posting good, useful advice...the trolls really do like to hand around these forums...

[dan99]

Good Call, definitely we need this consumer protection and what recourse if they don't deliver on time.

[User705]

SUMMARY as it will be read by outsiders.

The bitcoin community should not use bitcoins for payments.

Yes the irony, oh the irony.  "I need to put a large amount of debt on my credit card so I can purchase a magical Bitcoin thingy.  Then I will make money to get out of my credit card debt."

I always find it funny how individuals see credit cards as debt. If you had the cash anyways, using a credit card (At least for me) actually earns me at minimum a 1% cash back. So I actually make money using a card and it gets paid in full every month.

Then why bother with Bitcoin?

Oh I don't know the whole limited amount, can store a wallet in your head, accepted all over the world and no one can counterfeit it thingy.  Any reason you think bitcoin is designed for every single transaction possible?  That's like saying only shiny blue sea shells can be used as exchange tokens and not silver or gold or copper or whatever.  I'm ok with using a credit card at a coffee shop or at a shady ass magic unicorn powered asic seller.  Bitcoin isn't a solution to every single problem.  And escrow isn't a solution either.  You simply moved the weak link to the escrow and how much of a revolution is it paying the escrow 2% for processing instead of your credit card company???

[frejo]

I think this is all bad advice and the complete opposite of how the Bitcoin community should handle this situation. We cannot claim to want to eliminate the various bureaucracies and have a free-market and then turn around to run to them when things go wrong. We need to establish some market alternatives which address these issues.

+1

[KS]

Can peeps help advise w.r.t. US law? How is that affected state to state? I will update above with any succinct relevant material as and when it's shared below. Thanks!

Take note, swedish regulations differ B2C And B2B rights. If we as clients purchase a complete miner, its b2c. But if we only buy chips, its B2B company to company have different set of rules.
KonsumentVerket = The consumer Agency. Which only regulates the end client.

However if you have paid by card within the UK (and EU) at least;

Business to business sales, are consumer rights applicable?!

In short, yes, unless the company you are dealing with has specifically underwritten terms in their Terms and Conditions negating aspects of your consumer rights. This is known as an exclusion clause, and is yet another reason why Terms and Conditions should always be read and thoroughly discussed in your respective thread.

How do you know if the contract (business to business) takes away your statutory rights?

If the person who sold you the goods or services has taken away your statutory rights, there should be something in your contract about this. For example, it might say  the seller isn't responsible for goods that are unsatisfactory, don't match their description or aren't fit for purpose. Or it might say that the seller isn't responsible for any loss you've suffered because of their lack of care or skill. This type of content in a contract is called an exclusion clause.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/consumer_problems_with_business_to_business_services_e/consumer_protection_for_businesses.htm

This could be, but sweden has its own protection for the swedish consumers, to protect them. And it mostly only covers b2c inside sweden from what i know.

From UK's http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/consumer_problems_with_business_to_business_services_e/consumer_protection_for_businesses.htm

If you're running a business, you may make contracts with other businesses to buy their goods or services. But as a business, you may not have the same rights and protection as an ordinary consumer.

Your rights will depend almost completely on what's in your contract.

So, in short, NO, a business does NOT have the same rights as a consumer. Don't go assuming this, AT ALL. Read the fine print, that's where the "interesting" stuff is hidden.

International sales between businesses are even worse (think lawsuit in a foreign country, as the applicable law is usually the one of the seller). Consumer sales within the EU are regulated though, so, if you want maximum protection, you need to buy as a consumer, not a business.

[Bitcoinorama]

Can peeps help advise w.r.t. US law? How is that affected state to state? I will update above with any succinct relevant material as and when it's shared below. Thanks!

Take note, swedish regulations differ B2C And B2B rights. If we as clients purchase a complete miner, its b2c. But if we only buy chips, its B2B company to company have different set of rules.
KonsumentVerket = The consumer Agency. Which only regulates the end client.

However if you have paid by card within the UK (and EU) at least;

Business to business sales, are consumer rights applicable?!

In short, yes, unless the company you are dealing with has specifically underwritten terms in their Terms and Conditions negating aspects of your consumer rights. This is known as an exclusion clause, and is yet another reason why Terms and Conditions should always be read and thoroughly discussed in your respective thread.

How do you know if the contract (business to business) takes away your statutory rights?

If the person who sold you the goods or services has taken away your statutory rights, there should be something in your contract about this. For example, it might say  the seller isn't responsible for goods that are unsatisfactory, don't match their description or aren't fit for purpose. Or it might say that the seller isn't responsible for any loss you've suffered because of their lack of care or skill. This type of content in a contract is called an exclusion clause.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/consumer_problems_with_business_to_business_services_e/consumer_protection_for_businesses.htm

This could be, but sweden has its own protection for the swedish consumers, to protect them. And it mostly only covers b2c inside sweden from what i know.

From UK's http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/consumer_problems_with_business_to_business_services_e/consumer_protection_for_businesses.htm

If you're running a business, you may make contracts with other businesses to buy their goods or services. But as a business, you may not have the same rights and protection as an ordinary consumer.

Your rights will depend almost completely on what's in your contract.

So, in short, NO, a business does NOT have the same rights as a consumer. Don't go assuming this, AT ALL. Read the fine print, that's where the "interesting" stuff is hidden.

International sales between businesses are even worse (think lawsuit in a foreign country, as the applicable law is usually the one of the seller). Consumer sales within the EU are regulated though, so, if you want maximum protection, you need to buy as a consumer, not a business.

KS either you haven't read what I wrote, or you are repeating it.

It comes down to whether, or what 'exclusion clauses' exist in a vendor's T&C's that may affect your statutory consumer rights, otherwise they exist in the same capacity (in the UK).

[CYPER]

Bitcoinorama, do you know if money deposited on top of my CC limit are protected under Section 75?
For example if my CC limit is 3000GBP I can make a deposit of 2000GBP to my CC account and thus my available balance will be 5000GBP.

If I make a purchase for 5000GBP then for what amount is the bank liable?

[Bitcoinorama]

Bitcoinorama, do you know if money deposited on top of my CC limit are protected under Section 75?
For example if my CC limit is 3000GBP I can make a deposit of 2000GBP to my CC account and thus my available balance will be 5000GBP.

If I make a purchase for 5000GBP then for what amount is the bank liable?

I don't know off the top of my head, but according to that MoneySavingExpert.com link;

"I ordered and paid £15,991 in full for a new car but before I took delivery, the trader went into liquidation.

Thankfully I had paid the first £100 deposit on my Barclaycard Goldfish credit card. So I made a Section 75 claim. It took six months, but this week I received a credit to my card of the whole amount, just from having paid the first £100 on my card."

There's a really useful brief video on there.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases

Here's the full ruling;

The law behind this

This all comes from Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, hence why this is sexily named Section 75. It rather impenetrably says…

75. — (1) If the debtor under a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement falling within section 12(b) or (c) has, in relation to a transaction financed by the agreement, any claim against the supplier in respect of a misrepresentation or breach of contract, he shall have a like claim against the creditor, who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to the debtor. Read it in full

(2) Subject to any agreement between them, the creditor shall be entitled to be indemnified by the supplier for loss suffered by the creditor in satisfying his liability under sub-section (1), including costs reasonably incurred by him in defending proceedings instituted by the debtor.

(3) Sub-section (1) does not apply to a claim:
(a) under a non-commercial agreement,
(b) so far as the claim relates to a single item to which the supplier has attached a cash price not exceeding £100 or more than £30,000, or
(c) under a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement for running-account credit:
(i) which provides for the making of payments by the debtor in relation to specified periods which, in the case of an agreement which is not secured on land, do not exceed three months, and
(ii) which requires that the number of payments to be made by the debtor in repayments of the whole amount of the credit provided in each such period shall not exceed one.

(4) This section applies notwithstanding that the debtor, in entering into the transaction, exceeded the credit limit or otherwise contravened any term of the agreement.

(5) In an action brought against the creditor under sub-section (1) he shall be entitled, in accordance with rules of court, to have the supplier made a party in the proceedings.

75A (1)If the debtor under a linked credit agreement has a claim against the supplier in respect of a breach of contract the debtor may pursue that claim against the creditor where any of the conditions in subsection (2) are met.

(2)The conditions in subsection (1) are—
(a)that the supplier cannot be traced,
(b)that the debtor has contacted the supplier but the supplier has not responded,
(c)that the supplier is insolvent, or
(d)that the debtor has taken reasonable steps to pursue his claim against the supplier but has not obtained satisfaction for his claim.

(3)The steps referred to in subsection (2)(d) need not include litigation.

(4)For the purposes of subsection (2)(d) a debtor is to be deemed to have obtained satisfaction where he has accepted a replacement product or service or other compensation from the supplier in settlement of his claim.

(5)In this section “linked credit agreement” means a regulated consumer credit agreement which serves exclusively to finance an agreement for the supply of specific goods or the provision of a specific service and where—
(a)the creditor uses the services of the supplier in connection with the preparation or making of the credit agreement, or
(b)the specific goods or provision of a specific service are explicitly specified in the credit agreement.

(6)This section does not apply where—
(a)the cash value of the goods or service is £30, 000 or less,
(b)the linked credit agreement is for credit which exceeds £60, 260, or
(c)the linked credit agreement is entered into by the debtor wholly or predominantly for the purposes of a business carried on, or intended to be carried on, by him.

(7)Subsections (2) to (5) of section 16B (declaration by the debtor as to the purposes of the agreement) apply for the purposes of subsection (6)(c).

(8)This section does not apply to an agreement secured on land.

[CYPER]

Interesting...

So I can only make a 5GBP payment to KNCminer using my credit card and the rest with the debit card and still be protected for the full amount.
However because you can't pay via PayPal directly without having an account that might invalidate the protection, because you have to login into your PP account and pay that way

I wonder if KNCminer would be happy to get a small CC payment and the rest via a debit card.