Eptiv Bitcoin Escrow Service

[logansryche]

bump..

[1715179950]

1715179950

[1715179950]

1715179950

[1715179950]

1715179950

[1715179950]

1715179950

[Deprived]

Site seems down at the moment, so apologies if my question is answered there.

What's the process for dispute resolution?

e.g.

I'm the seller.
Buyer puts funds in your escrow.
I claim I shipped to him.
He says he didn't receive.

Now what?

How about if it's a physical item - I produce a postal receipt for sending it, he claims he received an empty package?
How about if it's for a service - e.g. a piece of artwork - and he says it wasn't of a usable quality?

What are the extra fees for such resolution by you?

As someone more likely to be a seller I'm not really keen if it's going to be like Paypal where essentially if a buyer claims dissatisfactiuon then it's always resolved in their favour.

[logansryche]

I'll have to get with spleeder to find out what happened to the site(it's probly a problem with rackspace again).
your questions are good ones actually... to answer:

I'm the seller.
Buyer puts funds in your escrow.
I claim I shipped to him.
He says he didn't receive.

The process of resolution in a case such as this would be to collect evidence. If there is enough evidence to show that the seller did in fact send the item, then we would keep on top of it to watch it. If there is evidence to show that the seller did not send the item, then the money would be released back to the buyer. Under no circumstances during the transaction is the money released to the seller unless the buyer confirms that the item has been received and is in the condition listed in the agreement. If not, then the process begins of wither the condition is in fact the seller's fault, or if it was something during shipping that would be out of anyones control.

How about if it's a physical item - I produce a postal receipt for sending it, he claims he received an empty package?

If the buyer claims an empy package and the money has been released to the seller, the investigative process wouldn't be any different. We would investigate wither or not the seller did in fact ship an empty box, or if the buyer is lying to get his money back(esentialy receiving a free item).

How about if it's for a service - e.g. a piece of artwork - and he says it wasn't of a usable quality?

Again, the process wouldn't be any different. In this case, we would gather all evidence and then determine what's determined to be usable quality of work.

What are the extra fees for such resolution by you?

There are no extra fees besides the 1% that's charged for the transaction.

As someone more likely to be a seller I'm not really keen if it's going to be like Paypal where essentially if a buyer claims dissatisfactiuon then it's always resolved in their favour.

I know what you mean as I've been there several times. Also seeing how Eptive is a 2 person operation, this eliminates what Paypal calls 'a reasonable investigative process'.

I hope I've answered all your questions Deprived.

[Deprived]

If the buyer claims an empy package and the money has been released to the seller, the investigative process wouldn't be any different. We would investigate wither or not the seller did in fact ship an empty box, or if the buyer is lying to get his money back(esentialy receiving a free item).

Thanks for the answers.  But in the above instance I'm really not seeing what investigation you could do.  But let's assume you investigated and both sides had as much evidence as you could reasonably expect.  i.e.:

Buyer had a photograph of an empty box.
Seller had a series of photographs (or even a video) of the goods in the box and then the box with a label on it addressed to the buyer.

You're still no nearer knowing the truth.  And that's why (I'd guess) Paypal just rule in favour of the buyer.  Because in a real situation the seller's never really going to have any evidence beyond their word that they sent the goods.  They can prove they sent something - but not that they sent what was promised.

So you then only really have two options (that I can see):

1.  Rule consistently in favour of one side or the other - i.e. always rule for seller or always rule for buyer.
2.  Rule based on past reputation.

The first is how Paypal pretty much do it.  The second opens up scamming by one side or the other - specifically either:

1.  Sellers can always get away with defrauding buyers who don't have a long history,
2.  Buyers can scam any new seller with impunity.

WHilst it would be nice to assume that people won't try to scam the fact is that they will.  AFter all, if they wouldn't try to scam then there'd be no need for your product in the first place!

[logansryche]

Thanks for the answers.  But in the above instance I'm really not seeing what investigation you could do.  But let's assume you investigated and both sides had as much evidence as you could reasonably expect.  i.e.:

Buyer had a photograph of an empty box.
Seller had a series of photographs (or even a video) of the goods in the box and then the box with a label on it addressed to the buyer.
You're still no nearer knowing the truth.  And that's why (I'd guess) Paypal just rule in favour of the buyer.  Because in a real situation the seller's never really going to have any evidence beyond their word that they sent the goods.  They can prove they sent something - but not that they sent what was promised.

So you then only really have two options (that I can see):

1.  Rule consistently in favour of one side or the other - i.e. always rule for seller or always rule for buyer.
2.  Rule based on past reputation.

The first is how Paypal pretty much do it.  The second opens up scamming by one side or the other - specifically either:

1.  Sellers can always get away with defrauding buyers who don't have a long history,
2.  Buyers can scam any new seller with impunity.

WHilst it would be nice to assume that people won't try to scam the fact is that they will.  AFter all, if they wouldn't try to scam then there'd be no need for your product in the first place!

Well when you're done investigating you can only rule for one side or the other. If in this case, the buyer submited a photo of an empty box and the seller had more proof that he put the items into the box and shipped them, then yes. The investigation would favor the seller. However, if it were vice versa and the buyer had enough proof that the item did not arrive in the box, the ruling would be in favor of the buyer. Ruling finds either the seller is dirty, the buyer is dirty or the shipping service is dirty(*cough*usps*cough*).

[logansryche]

Not sure what was wrong, but the site's back up and running.

[logansryche]

bump

[logansryche]

bump

[logansryche]

bump