|
 |
| | | Author: | Locutis  | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 09:01 | | Subject: | Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 497 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 09:26 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 112 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Good post. A lot of what you say is true. It is time to change. Instead of policies
that promote the quantity of sellers, BL should now refocus on promoting the
QUALITY of sellers and making this site more safe and secure for buyers - and
sellers. As you say, bad publicity from scams is going to cause more lost business
than having policies that might discourage a few new sellers from setting up
shop here.
BrickLink already has almost 8000 stores. A few new sellers who may be turned
away by stricter new seller entry requirements won't have any effect at all
on revenues. Because whatever they have to sell I am sure there are already several
current sellers here who also have the exact same thing to sell. If buyers can't
buy what they want from one seller, there are many other sellers they can buy
from.
Let's hope BL 2.0 adopts some of these changes.
Thor
P.S. I remember your posts. But I don't remember others then being so hostile
to your suggestions. People have been making the same or similar suggestions
for years. Maybe it is time to actually start implementing some of those changes.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 10:17 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | Good post. A lot of what you say is true. It is time to change. Instead of policies
that promote the quantity of sellers, BL should now refocus on promoting the
QUALITY of sellers and making this site more safe and secure for buyers - and
sellers. As you say, bad publicity from scams is going to cause more lost business
than having policies that might discourage a few new sellers from setting up
shop here.
BrickLink already has almost 8000 stores. A few new sellers who may be turned
away by stricter new seller entry requirements won't have any effect at all
on revenues. Because whatever they have to sell I am sure there are already several
current sellers here who also have the exact same thing to sell. If buyers can't
buy what they want from one seller, there are many other sellers they can buy
from.
Let's hope BL 2.0 adopts some of these changes.
Thor
P.S. I remember your posts. But I don't remember others then being so hostile
to your suggestions. People have been making the same or similar suggestions
for years. Maybe it is time to actually start implementing some of those changes.
|
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=510636
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 10:26 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
Yes, I remember that thread and discussion. While your suggestion was overwhelmingly
opposed at the time, I did not see any nasty or hostile comments. Nor do I
see many people generally opposed to the idea of increasing new seller entry
requirements. They just don't think the credit card idea is a good one. However,
there are multiple ways to address this growing problem. They have all been repeatedly
discussed here in the Forum and I am sure the Powers That Be are aware of them.
Like you, I hope they incorporate some of those ideas in BL 2.0.
Thor
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 09:42 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 108 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I am saddened by messages like this as overall BrickLinkers are (in my experience)
one of the most trustworthy groups of buyers and sellers you will find anywhere
on-line. I agree that even small numbers of scam stories can damage the reputation
of the site and its' honest sellers so I voted yes to the idea of tightening
up on seller registration.
one other (or additional) option may be to have a voluntary seller quality registration
scheme which could be indicated by a badge or something on the storefront
linking to a buy safety page explaining that such sellers have been checked out,
whatever by the site. New sellers might be required to put up a bond to get it,
established sellers might get it based on existing reputation. It could be shown
alongside the FB score perhaps. Needs more thinking through but I think worthy
of some effort, it could pay back for the site and good sellers. In the mean
time, your advice of buying from sellers with an established record is good,
especially if spending sums of money that you could not afford to lose... big
sets, too good to be true prices, new seller = buyer beware.
Robert
In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Brettj666 | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 10:44 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 75 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | I am saddened by messages like this as overall BrickLinkers are (in my experience)
one of the most trustworthy groups of buyers and sellers you will find anywhere
on-line. I agree that even small numbers of scam stories can damage the reputation
of the site and its' honest sellers so I voted yes to the idea of tightening
up on seller registration.
one other (or additional) option may be to have a voluntary seller quality registration
scheme which could be indicated by a badge or something on the storefront
linking to a buy safety page explaining that such sellers have been checked out,
whatever by the site. New sellers might be required to put up a bond to get it,
established sellers might get it based on existing reputation. It could be shown
alongside the FB score perhaps. Needs more thinking through but I think worthy
of some effort, it could pay back for the site and good sellers. In the mean
time, your advice of buying from sellers with an established record is good,
especially if spending sums of money that you could not afford to lose... big
sets, too good to be true prices, new seller = buyer beware.
Robert
|
A big issue at play is the psychology of buyers too, and that's what these
sellers prey on. They want what they want and are always on the hunt of a lower
than available price.
Even experienced buyers with access to the forum can get swindled when they just
can't let that deal pass by.. They also have an often unfailing faith in
paypal that they are protected.
Instead of selling sets dirt cheap, the memorable person in my eyes is the one
that simply parted out expensive parts cheaply.
"no one that sells parts could scam me" and thus welcome to the world of the
easy buck.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people that could lend experience, but they
don't get engaged.
Eg, you give me a set of parameters for checks, and I'm pretty sure I can
get around them to scam someone.
You have to be diligent enough that most scammers will say it's not worth
it and most real sellers will think it is.
I don't think parting with $5 will do it. I think the guy who took Locutus
and 25 others for $10000 would easily part with $5
| |
In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:17 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Brettj666 writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
Eg, you give me a set of parameters for checks, and I'm pretty sure I can
get around them to scam someone.
You have to be diligent enough that most scammers will say it's not worth
it and most real sellers will think it is.
I don't think parting with $5 will do it. I think the guy who took Locutus
and 25 others for $10000 would easily part with $5
|
You cannot verify a credit card, or access PayPal address information without
doing a transaction through that service. The $5 allows a charge to go through,
and access to the cardholder or PayPal account holder information.
While $5 won't prevent a scammer, the required verification of address and
other information to prove validity and identity of a person will. I guess you
don't realize I'm the director for a corporation with over $100,000,000
in annual sales, that deals with frauds and scams daily. I'm not pulling
my ideas out of a hat.
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | jhkc... | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:08 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | I am saddened by messages like this as overall BrickLinkers are (in my experience)
one of the most trustworthy groups of buyers and sellers you will find anywhere
on-line. I agree that even small numbers of scam stories can damage the reputation
of the site and its' honest sellers so I voted yes to the idea of tightening
up on seller registration.
one other (or additional) option may be to have a voluntary seller quality registration
scheme which could be indicated by a badge or something on the storefront
linking to a buy safety page explaining that such sellers have been checked out,
whatever by the site. New sellers might be required to put up a bond to get it,
established sellers might get it based on existing reputation. It could be shown
alongside the FB score perhaps. Needs more thinking through but I think worthy
of some effort, it could pay back for the site and good sellers. In the mean
time, your advice of buying from sellers with an established record is good,
especially if spending sums of money that you could not afford to lose... big
sets, too good to be true prices, new seller = buyer beware.
Robert
|
I like the badge idea. The whole idea of a seller verification system is smart,
but allowing serious sellers vet themselves with a voluntary system seems more
business friendly.
It would probably require all sorts of disclaimers on BL's side of things,
but if it's community supported, maybe it would help mitigate buyer risk.
Might need to have several levels of participation to be fair to casual, honest
sellers. You wouldn't want to discourage small, "extra parts folks" with
a strictly two tiered system that unduly taints them as "un-badged" scammers.
Jason
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | goshe7 | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:15 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, jhkc... writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | I am saddened by messages like this as overall BrickLinkers are (in my experience)
one of the most trustworthy groups of buyers and sellers you will find anywhere
on-line. I agree that even small numbers of scam stories can damage the reputation
of the site and its' honest sellers so I voted yes to the idea of tightening
up on seller registration.
one other (or additional) option may be to have a voluntary seller quality registration
scheme which could be indicated by a badge or something on the storefront
linking to a buy safety page explaining that such sellers have been checked out,
whatever by the site. New sellers might be required to put up a bond to get it,
established sellers might get it based on existing reputation. It could be shown
alongside the FB score perhaps. Needs more thinking through but I think worthy
of some effort, it could pay back for the site and good sellers. In the mean
time, your advice of buying from sellers with an established record is good,
especially if spending sums of money that you could not afford to lose... big
sets, too good to be true prices, new seller = buyer beware.
Robert
|
I like the badge idea. The whole idea of a seller verification system is smart,
but allowing serious sellers vet themselves with a voluntary system seems more
business friendly.
It would probably require all sorts of disclaimers on BL's side of things,
but if it's community supported, maybe it would help mitigate buyer risk.
Might need to have several levels of participation to be fair to casual, honest
sellers. You wouldn't want to discourage small, "extra parts folks" with
a strictly two tiered system that unduly taints them as "un-badged" scammers.
Jason
|
My objections:
1. We don't need to add anything clunky, cumbersome, or non-intuitive to
the BrickLink shopping experience. BrickLink has a steep learning curve and
added a "Trusted Seller" adds complexity to the shopping as new users would need
to learn what this badge means and why it benefits them.
2. If earning the badge is truly a good verification process and stores without
it face a penalty (i.e. being able to filter for only "trusted stores" when
searching) most every legitimate seller will submit to the verification process
anyways. So you are just using a different means to the same end.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | jhkc... | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:37 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, goshe7 writes:
| | In Suggestions, jhkc... writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | I am saddened by messages like this as overall BrickLinkers are (in my experience)
one of the most trustworthy groups of buyers and sellers you will find anywhere
on-line. I agree that even small numbers of scam stories can damage the reputation
of the site and its' honest sellers so I voted yes to the idea of tightening
up on seller registration.
one other (or additional) option may be to have a voluntary seller quality registration
scheme which could be indicated by a badge or something on the storefront
linking to a buy safety page explaining that such sellers have been checked out,
whatever by the site. New sellers might be required to put up a bond to get it,
established sellers might get it based on existing reputation. It could be shown
alongside the FB score perhaps. Needs more thinking through but I think worthy
of some effort, it could pay back for the site and good sellers. In the mean
time, your advice of buying from sellers with an established record is good,
especially if spending sums of money that you could not afford to lose... big
sets, too good to be true prices, new seller = buyer beware.
Robert
|
I like the badge idea. The whole idea of a seller verification system is smart,
but allowing serious sellers vet themselves with a voluntary system seems more
business friendly.
It would probably require all sorts of disclaimers on BL's side of things,
but if it's community supported, maybe it would help mitigate buyer risk.
Might need to have several levels of participation to be fair to casual, honest
sellers. You wouldn't want to discourage small, "extra parts folks" with
a strictly two tiered system that unduly taints them as "un-badged" scammers.
Jason
|
My objections:
1. We don't need to add anything clunky, cumbersome, or non-intuitive to
the BrickLink shopping experience. BrickLink has a steep learning curve and
added a "Trusted Seller" adds complexity to the shopping as new users would need
to learn what this badge means and why it benefits them.
2. If earning the badge is truly a good verification process and stores without
it face a penalty (i.e. being able to filter for only "trusted stores" when
searching) most every legitimate seller will submit to the verification process
anyways. So you are just using a different means to the same end.
|
I agree. A filter would unfairly penalize good sellers and that would hurt the
market.
That's also why I like Robert's suggestion for a linked page explaining
the designation. Regular members wouldn't need to read it every time. It
would simply serve as another tutorial, for those new members that chose to read
it.
The OP's point about lost customers and negative word of mouth is a big deal,
though. So I hope something can be established.
Jason
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:48 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, jhkc... writes:
| |
The OP's point about lost customers and negative word of mouth is a big deal,
though.
|
It most definitely is. Like any successful business, BrickLink has earned its
share of haters. There is, in fact, a growing group of people who despise and
distrust BrickLink, who have vowed never to use it again, and who talk bad about
brickLink to anyone who will listen. Many of these people are the victims of
scams that occurred on BrickLink who received little support or sympathy from
BrickLink. My own LUG includes several of these people. And most of the other
AFOL websites have increasing numbers of anti-BrickLink comments publicly posted
by such people. Over the past few years, I have noticed these people becoming
increasingly vocal and their negative comments about BrickLink increasing in
frequency. In short, the bad publicity against BrickLink is growing, and most
of this appears to be due to buyers who were burned here and found no satisfactory
recourse through BrickLink and/or who were surprised to learn that BrickLink
does very little to prevent scammers from setting up shop here(1). Something
more needs to be done to start reducing this problem. Keeping the business as
usual status quo will only make things worse.
Thor
(1) While AdminEric seems to be making more of an effort lately to shut down
these scammers, he can't catch them all and oftentimes he can't stop
them before some damage is done.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | BLUSER_451311 | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 10:34 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 81 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
|
While your idea has merit, it's not going to fly. This debate is as old as
the site itself, back when it used to be known as Brickbay.
The better solution, perhaps in the upcoming 2.0, would be to send out
notifications when a buyer/seller has received negative feedback for those who
have done business with the store/buyer. At the very least, with open
orders.
This is supposed to be a community, so it's important this community look
out for each other and the best way to do this is with an early warning system.
I would love nothing short than to be notified if a seller I'm dealing with
has received negative feedback. I don't check a person's feedback daily,
and I don't intend to start, to stave off possible scamming.
The system should be more than capable of doing this for people, both buyers
and sellers.
The reduction of fraud won't be reduced to 0, but a notice could allow other
potential victims to put immediate stop payments to buyers.
Those using Paypal should really start letting them handle the investigations.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Brettj666 | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 10:49 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Violynne writes:
| | In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
|
While your idea has merit, it's not going to fly. This debate is as old as
the site itself, back when it used to be known as Brickbay.
The better solution, perhaps in the upcoming 2.0, would be to send out
notifications when a buyer/seller has received negative feedback for those who
have done business with the store/buyer. At the very least, with open
orders.
This is supposed to be a community, so it's important this community look
out for each other and the best way to do this is with an early warning system.
I would love nothing short than to be notified if a seller I'm dealing with
has received negative feedback. I don't check a person's feedback daily,
and I don't intend to start, to stave off possible scamming.
The system should be more than capable of doing this for people, both buyers
and sellers.
The reduction of fraud won't be reduced to 0, but a notice could allow other
potential victims to put immediate stop payments to buyers.
Those using Paypal should really start letting them handle the investigations.
|
I know when I sell something on amazon, they hold my payment for 2 weeks.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | goshe7 | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:10 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Violynne writes:
| | In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
|
While your idea has merit, it's not going to fly. This debate is as old as
the site itself, back when it used to be known as Brickbay.
|
This isn't Brickbay. Or BrickLink. The current site is more like the
zombie remnants of BrickLink. Not quite "living" but still goes on existing.
So what's my point? We need to stop pretending this site is part of a continuous
growth and development from the original Brickbay. Recognize that it has changed
and some of the fundamental philosophies of Brickbay are no longer applicable.
| | The better solution, perhaps in the upcoming 2.0, would be to send out
notifications when a buyer/seller has received negative feedback for those who
have done business with the store/buyer. At the very least, with open
orders.
|
I'm not sure why this is better. Would the aforementioned scammer have just
gotten $2k before being caught? A change that simply stops the bleeding isn't
better than one that can prevent it altogether.
| | This is supposed to be a community, so it's important this community look
out for each other and the best way to do this is with an early warning system.
I would love nothing short than to be notified if a seller I'm dealing with
has received negative feedback. I don't check a person's feedback daily,
and I don't intend to start, to stave off possible scamming.
The system should be more than capable of doing this for people, both buyers
and sellers.
The reduction of fraud won't be reduced to 0, but a notice could allow other
potential victims to put immediate stop payments to buyers.
Those using Paypal should really start letting them handle the investigations.
|
I'm not saying this is a bad idea. I'm just not sure why it is better
if it focuses on limiting the damage and not correcting the root cause.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:29 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Violynne writes:
| |
The better solution, perhaps in the upcoming 2.0, would be to send out
notifications when a buyer/seller has received negative feedback for those who
have done business with the store/buyer. At the very least, with open
orders.
|
I am sorry, but I think this is a horrible idea. Why should good honest established
sellers have official-looking notices sent to all their customers whenever they
get a negative feedback? Why scare all customers because one is unhappy? This
is way overkill. Every big established seller is going to get the occasional
negative. Sometimes that negative is unjust and will soon be removed. Other times
it is petty. And other times it is legitimate but still handled well by the seller.
I just don't understand why we should scare all other buyers of this seller.
Even if this idea is limited to a new seller during some sort of probationary
period, I don't think it will do much good. By the time the first negative
is received, it could be a week or more since orders started rolling in and,
by then, most of the damage will have been done.
In short, I think sending out these scary official looking emails accomplishes
little and causes far too much collateral damage to good honest sellers. It will
also greatly increase the number of NPB claims.
It might be different if notices were sent to buyers if an NSS were COMPLETED
against one of their sellers. But then again, that will probably be far too late
to help most buyers.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | BLUSER_451311 | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 15:02 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, Violynne writes:
|
| | I am sorry, but I think this is a horrible idea. Why should good honest established
sellers have official-looking notices sent to all their customers whenever they
get a negative feedback?
|
I'll explain this a bit more in a bit.
| | Why scare all customers because one is unhappy?
|
This statement is over-dramatic.
No, it's not. Many sites have a notice on change option.
| | Every big established seller is going to get the occasional
negative. Sometimes that negative is unjust and will soon be removed. Other times
it is petty. And other times it is legitimate but still handled well by the seller.
I just don't understand why we should scare all other buyers of this seller.
|
Here's how I'd envision the system to work.
Let's say I put in an order to a shop regardless of their standing.
Things seem to be going well, until all of a sudden, I'm receiving notices
the store I'm transacting has received a cautionary amount of negative feedback
within a short amount of time. I dismiss the flag, but the warning is increased.
You think this is overkill? I disagree.
ONE negative feedback isn't enough to trigger the notification system. At
the very least, 3+ negative feedback in one day by multiple parties could do
it.
I challenge any store to stand up and tell me they receive this amount of -FB
on a daily basis. That would be a concern for any member regardless if
they're a buyer or seller, right?
| | Even if this idea is limited to a new seller during some sort of probationary
period, I don't think it will do much good. By the time the first negative
is received, it could be a week or more since orders started rolling in and,
by then, most of the damage will have been done.
|
As I said, it won't prevent fraud completely, but it will give people the
ability to be aware of a potential of fraud and be on the ready to file
a claim with Paypal (since this seems to be the preferred method of payment on
the site).
Moreso, a system like this could make it easier for ADMIN to temporarily shut
down stores rather than having to wade through emails of people ticked off.
FB is the only method we have to determine trust on the site.
If a store or buyer is suddenly racking up -FB, that should be a warning flag.
| | It might be different if notices were sent to buyers if an NSS were COMPLETED
against one of their sellers. But then again, that will probably be far too late
to help most buyers.
|
Agreed, because the NSS system is flawed by design in the waiting requirement
to be completed as a notification system.
Ironically, the NSS system is automated to shut down the store if a number of
them are filed within a certain amount of time.
That... can be tweaked. 
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 15:50 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Violynne writes:
| |
Here's how I'd envision the system to work.
Let's say I put in an order to a shop regardless of their standing.
Things seem to be going well, until all of a sudden, I'm receiving notices
the store I'm transacting has received a cautionary amount of negative feedback
within a short amount of time. I dismiss the flag, but the warning is increased.
You think this is overkill? I disagree.
ONE negative feedback isn't enough to trigger the notification system. At
the very least, 3+ negative feedback in one day by multiple parties could do
it.
I challenge any store to stand up and tell me they receive this amount of -FB
on a daily basis. That would be a concern for any member regardless if
they're a buyer or seller, right?
|
OK, three negs in one day is different. Your original post did not mention this
important clarification. It seemed to suggest notifying ALL buyers even for a
single negative feedback against one of their sellers.
| |
| | Even if this idea is limited to a new seller during some sort of probationary
period, I don't think it will do much good. By the time the first negative
is received, it could be a week or more since orders started rolling in and,
by then, most of the damage will have been done.
|
As I said, it won't prevent fraud completely, but it will give people the
ability to be aware of a potential of fraud and be on the ready to file
a claim with Paypal (since this seems to be the preferred method of payment on
the site).
|
Even so, I am not convinced this would significantly reduce scams. Because by
the time a seller starts racking up three or more negatives in one day, most
of the damage has probably already been done.
This idea may have some merit as part of a package of preventative and mitigating
measures. But not so much as a first line of defense against these scammers.
Something stronger needs to be done much sooner.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | edeevo | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:04 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Excellent post! What I find hard to understand is what the motivation for Bricklink
would be in these situations... are these scammers actually paying Bricklink
fees on those sales? (highly doubtful), so why one Earth would avoiding these
issues benefit Bricklink? (other than the negative benefit of lost sales on would-be
buyers who got scammed)...
Life is Good.
~Ed.
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | aftepes | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:25 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
So after 500 successful purchases, am I to undergo the same scrutiny as someone
with no feedback? If I am, I'm not going to bother. If I'm not where's
the line and why are we not applying rules consistently across the board?
I've seen established sellers here go rogue after being successful for quite
some time. We even have established sellers who don't treat buyers with the
respect they deserve, so I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish here.
Setting a barrier to entry like this is not something that's likely to be
set up.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:32 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, aftepes writes:
| | In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
So after 500 successful purchases, am I to undergo the same scrutiny as someone
with no feedback? If I am, I'm not going to bother. If I'm not where's
the line and why are we not applying rules consistently across the board?
I've seen established sellers here go rogue after being successful for quite
some time. We even have established sellers who don't treat buyers with the
respect they deserve, so I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish here.
Setting a barrier to entry like this is not something that's likely to be
set up.
|
Existing proven sellers are not the focus of this suggestion. My focus is new
sellers. That's the problem I'm trying to draw into light.
While existing sellers going rogue may also be a problem, we can't address
two different types of problems with one solution.
My suggestion addresses the problems associated with fake sellers. If you have
a problem with existing, trusted sellers who go rogue, come up with your own
solution and post it. This suggestion was never intended to address them.
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:36 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, aftepes writes:
| |
So after 500 successful purchases, am I to undergo the same scrutiny as someone
with no feedback? If I am, I'm not going to bother. If I'm not where's
the line and why are we not applying rules consistently across the board?
|
I think an exception could also be made for established buyers with already existing
good feedback. Rules don't have to be consistently applied where the risk
and actual experience are very different.
| | I've seen established sellers here go rogue after being successful for quite
some time.
|
So have I. But I can count them on one hand over the past ten years. During that
same time there have been HUNDREDS maybe THOUSANDS of new 0 feedback scam sellers.
Like triage, you need to focus on the greater risks.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | BLUSER_424058 | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 11:44 | | Subject: | (Cancelled) | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | (Cancelled) |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | RobErNat | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 12:48 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
I won't vote, as I'm apposed to any restriction for a seller to come
online on this site and having to 'proof' him/her-self.
On the other hand I'm not opposed to a restriction for brand new sellers,
but then valuewise and through a mathematical calculation.
BL (or any site) could make a calculation that sets a restriction on what a brand
new sellers can put on for sale 'valuewise'
A brand new shop that suddenly sells for $xxxx of MISB's: it's rather
rare and most of the time to good to be true. So new stores (less the 5 FB's)
cold be tagged easely by not allowing them to set items for sale for values higher
then $100 (example). Most sellers will start with a lot less (small sets or lose
parts). On top of that a store 'maximum' value of $1000 in total, that
increases after 5, 10, 20 FB's: 1000$ to start, $2000 at FB 5, $ 3000 at
FB 10, $5000 at +20 FB's.
A restriction of this kind will avoid '0' FB listing Cafe corners, Millennium
Falcons and other Statues of Liberty's on day 1...
It will also avoid 'smart' ones who PO sets 'fictively' with
thousand of $ in one shot (remember Bjornn)
Such a system will 'force' brand new sellers to build up feedback and
start 'little' (what most sellers do anyway when they start) and work
towards more/bigger.
Would it be a flawless system: no, but at least it will avoid a scam of $10000
and 25 users in just 2 or 3 weeks.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Elenoe | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 14:03 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, RobErNat writes:
| | In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
I won't vote, as I'm apposed to any restriction for a seller to come
online on this site and having to 'proof' him/her-self.
On the other hand I'm not opposed to a restriction for brand new sellers,
but then valuewise and through a mathematical calculation.
BL (or any site) could make a calculation that sets a restriction on what a brand
new sellers can put on for sale 'valuewise'
A brand new shop that suddenly sells for $xxxx of MISB's: it's rather
rare and most of the time to good to be true. So new stores (less the 5 FB's)
cold be tagged easely by not allowing them to set items for sale for values higher
then $100 (example). Most sellers will start with a lot less (small sets or lose
parts). On top of that a store 'maximum' value of $1000 in total, that
increases after 5, 10, 20 FB's: 1000$ to start, $2000 at FB 5, $ 3000 at
FB 10, $5000 at +20 FB's.
A restriction of this kind will avoid '0' FB listing Cafe corners, Millennium
Falcons and other Statues of Liberty's on day 1...
|
I like this idea. Personally I was a buyer only for the 1st year. By the time
I opened my store I knew what habits had annoyed me and what I wanted to do to
avoid making the seller mistakes I so disliked. I also spoke to a few long term
sellers who advised me how to avoid losing money selling on here.
I think I learned some valuable lessons as a buyer only; and though a year may
be too long I think maybe a month using the site before being allowed to sell
large quantities of Lego is not only reasonable, but helpful to new users. Feedback
is very useful, but I'm sure I'm not alone in finding many new buyers
either cannot be bothered to give it, or fail to realise how important it can
be as a tool to weed out less reputable sellers. I notice that a lot of people
also start out using feedback then think they don't need to bother any more.
We cannot make people use it, or read all the tutorial stuff, so something else
which makes new sellers take time to get used to the site and use it responsibly
can only be a good thing.
| | It will also avoid 'smart' ones who PO sets 'fictively' with
thousand of $ in one shot (remember Bjornn)
Such a system will 'force' brand new sellers to build up feedback and
start 'little' (what most sellers do anyway when they start) and work
towards more/bigger.
Would it be a flawless system: no, but at least it will avoid a scam of $10000
and 25 users in just 2 or 3 weeks.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 13:20 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I am going to say yes to this suggestion. Probably there are additional nuances
and issues to work out with the fine details of how to administer the proposed
solution.
When I think of how I started my store, yes, it would have been more difficult
if I had to prove somehow that I was a bonafide person, not a scammer.
But because I was serious, becoming a seller was not a spur of the moment impulse.
I tried to do my homework and to learn as much as I could about Bricklink and
how it worked. I trolled the forum to pick up all the tips on successful selling,
before opening my store. So I believe that my serious interest would have eventually
overcome any modest barriers to becoming a seller.
If other prospective sellers had to be similarly careful, it could be a good
thing for the quality of selling as a whole. Someone might argue that "This
would keep out the small seller who only wants to clear out a few pieces of their
personal collection". Yes, maybe it would. But that is not a hardship to Bricklink
if those small temporary sellers are just looking to sell quick without considering
the needs of customer service.
We see it here on the forum from time to time: new sellers, with zero feedback
who are excited about opening a store but who have no idea about part quality,
shipping costs, store terms, extra fees etc. Those people are not scammers, but
they might be jumping in to selling without sufficient regard to what it takes
to be a good seller. If a verification process makes them do a bit more homework
in order to sell off a couple of sets, then so much the better.
My first caveat to accepting the proposal is that no one should be under any
illusions that any system will prevent all fraud attempts. (Yes, a scam is a
fraud!) But just because we can't fix everything does not mean we should
do not do anything.
My second is that I am not in favour of any additional barriers or verifications
for buyers. Anything that will make it easier for buyers of all types to spend
their money on Bricklink is fine with me. But I can get behind ideas to improve
the quality of sellers to help buyers.
I hope that Bricklink management will give consideration and work out the details
in the best manner possible for all concerned.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 13:49 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, calebfishn writes:
| | I am going to say yes to this suggestion. Probably there are additional nuances
and issues to work out with the fine details of how to administer the proposed
solution.
When I think of how I started my store, yes, it would have been more difficult
if I had to prove somehow that I was a bonafide person, not a scammer.
But because I was serious, becoming a seller was not a spur of the moment impulse.
I tried to do my homework and to learn as much as I could about Bricklink and
how it worked. I trolled the forum to pick up all the tips on successful selling,
before opening my store. So I believe that my serious interest would have eventually
overcome any modest barriers to becoming a seller.
If other prospective sellers had to be similarly careful, it could be a good
thing for the quality of selling as a whole. Someone might argue that "This
would keep out the small seller who only wants to clear out a few pieces of their
personal collection". Yes, maybe it would. But that is not a hardship to Bricklink
if those small temporary sellers are just looking to sell quick without considering
the needs of customer service.
We see it here on the forum from time to time: new sellers, with zero feedback
who are excited about opening a store but who have no idea about part quality,
shipping costs, store terms, extra fees etc. Those people are not scammers, but
they might be jumping in to selling without sufficient regard to what it takes
to be a good seller. If a verification process makes them do a bit more homework
in order to sell off a couple of sets, then so much the better.
My first caveat to accepting the proposal is that no one should be under any
illusions that any system will prevent all fraud attempts. (Yes, a scam is a
fraud!) But just because we can't fix everything does not mean we should
do not do anything.
My second is that I am not in favour of any additional barriers or verifications
for buyers. Anything that will make it easier for buyers of all types to spend
their money on Bricklink is fine with me. But I can get behind ideas to improve
the quality of sellers to help buyers.
I hope that Bricklink management will give consideration and work out the details
in the best manner possible for all concerned.
|
I fully agree with everything you mention above. While the suggestion isn't
foolproof, it would catch some fraud.
Buyers need not be screened, at least not as a function of this suggestion.
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 13:24 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I remember the incident. What a double embarrassment it was to see the fraud
criminal was a Canadian.
In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | eileenkeeney | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 16:27 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
Wasn't there a suggestion, by Admin, some time ago, with suggested policies
for reducing fraud.
We were being asked how we felt about the suggestions.
I don't remember all the details, but it did involve sellers having a limited
amount of dollar value of sales in a non completed state, until established.
With this process, no one seller would end up with $10000 in orders before they
were suspended.
I think that the suggestion also limited how much buyers could order before being
established.
I do not remember the details. But it was being suggested by Admin, so I would
not conclude that Admin (or BL) does not have a high interest in reducing Fraud.
I also think there should be a strong recommendation to buyers that they NEVER
risk more than they can afford to lose (without much grief about it) on a single
sale, from a non established seller.
This does not mean I think that buyer's are stupid to have made a large dollar
order with a non established seller. Sometimes the risk is worth the potential
pay out, and I understand that.
I once was tempted to order several hundred dollars worth of parts from a new
BL store. Prices were very good and the store had large quantities of the types
of parts I often buy.
Instead I made a much smaller order, due to the store not yet being established.
The store ended up getting suspended. I also did not rush to pay, as I was still
considering adding to the order. Then about a day later the seller lost selling
privileges and my order was cancelled.
But even if I had paid, it was a minimal amount, well within my acceptable risk
limit.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Brettj666 | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 16:35 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 61 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
| |
Wasn't there a suggestion, by Admin, some time ago, with suggested policies
for reducing fraud.
We were being asked how we felt about the suggestions.
I don't remember all the details, but it did involve sellers having a limited
amount of dollar value of sales in a non completed state, until established.
With this process, no one seller would end up with $10000 in orders before they
were suspended.
I think that the suggestion also limited how much buyers could order before being
established.
I do not remember the details. But it was being suggested by Admin, so I would
not conclude that Admin (or BL) does not have a high interest in reducing Fraud.
I also think there should be a strong recommendation to buyers that they NEVER
risk more than they can afford to lose (without much grief about it) on a single
sale, from a non established seller.
This does not mean I think that buyer's are stupid to have made a large dollar
order with a non established seller. Sometimes the risk is worth the potential
pay out, and I understand that.
I once was tempted to order several hundred dollars worth of parts from a new
BL store. Prices were very good and the store had large quantities of the types
of parts I often buy.
Instead I made a much smaller order, due to the store not yet being established.
The store ended up getting suspended. I also did not rush to pay, as I was still
considering adding to the order. Then about a day later the seller lost selling
privileges and my order was cancelled.
But even if I had paid, it was a minimal amount, well within my acceptable risk
limit.
|
Was that the new user with 40,000 sand green parts? looks like he parted out
multiple Statue of liberties, green grocers, etc, ?
I often reference that one. Glad you didn't get burned
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | eileenkeeney | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 22:30 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Brettj666 writes:
| |
Was that the new user with 40,000 sand green parts? looks like he parted out
multiple Statue of liberties, green grocers, etc, ?
I often reference that one. Glad you didn't get burned
|
Yes that was it, and he had a large quantity of the 1x1 dark red bricks as well.
I was so hoping I was really going to get those.
I am glad I did not get burned as well.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Proprietor | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 23:57 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=Obrienbricks
In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brettj666 writes:
| |
Was that the new user with 40,000 sand green parts? looks like he parted out
multiple Statue of liberties, green grocers, etc, ?
I often reference that one. Glad you didn't get burned
|
Yes that was it, and he had a large quantity of the 1x1 dark red bricks as well.
I was so hoping I was really going to get those.
I am glad I did not get burned as well.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Oryx_Bricks | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2014 00:18 | | Subject: | (Cancelled) | | Viewed: | 63 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | (Cancelled) |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 17:35 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
| | I also think there should be a strong recommendation to buyers that they NEVER
risk more than they can afford to lose (without much grief about it) on a single
sale, from a non established seller.
This does not mean I think that buyer's are stupid to have made a large dollar
order with a non established seller. Sometimes the risk is worth the potential
pay out, and I understand that.
|
Seriously!?!? Maybe we should make a large banner on the site and simply tell
this to all buyers.
I'm sure that would go over real well for new buyers. I know if I saw that
when I was shopping this site when I first registered, I would have switched
over to eBay.
Should the main focus of seller fraud-prevention is simply to warn buyers to
not buy unless you want to lose your money?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | BLUSER_27068 | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 17:52 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | I'm sure that would go over real well for new buyers. I know if I saw that
when I was shopping this site when I first registered, I would have switched
over to eBay.
|
In my opinion ebay certainly protects the buyer more than BL does, at least right
now.
I would much rather see new sellers go through some sort of verification process
BEFORE they can start listing expensive things here.
And please don't use the "common sense" excuse.
We are adults, spending hundreds of dollars on .75 cents worth of molded plastic
kids toys.
We have all tossed any form of "common sense" to the wind years ago!
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | jhkc... | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 19:01 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, TexMexSu writes:
snip
| |
We are adults, spending hundreds of dollars on .75 cents worth of molded plastic
kids toys.
|
p.s. We're all nuts, but most of us are legit!
There's your site banner right there... haha!
Jason
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | eileenkeeney | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 22:27 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 87 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
| | I also think there should be a strong recommendation to buyers that they NEVER
risk more than they can afford to lose (without much grief about it) on a single
sale, from a non established seller.
This does not mean I think that buyer's are stupid to have made a large dollar
order with a non established seller. Sometimes the risk is worth the potential
pay out, and I understand that.
|
Seriously!?!? Maybe we should make a large banner on the site and simply tell
this to all buyers.
I'm sure that would go over real well for new buyers. I know if I saw that
when I was shopping this site when I first registered, I would have switched
over to eBay.
Should the main focus of seller fraud-prevention is simply to warn buyers to
not buy unless you want to lose your money?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
Are you a politician?
A subset of a post (as you have quoted above) is not necessarily what the poster
considers to be the main focus. However, taken alone (and ignoring the rest
of the post) can make it seem like this.
Politicians do this often, in their advertising.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2014 00:55 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 89 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
No, but I play one on tv.
Locutis
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Pokernut | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 18:18 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
Having read all these replies I see some reasonable ideas that could be implemented,
and some that are just too over the top.
I dare say I am gonna get a fair bit of stick for this suggestion but hey, we
all have a voice and we all have an opinion.
This thread is about preventing NEW sellers, or very new sellers running scams
and having success..... so why not KISS it.
Simplest thing I can come up with.........Prevent new accounts from opening a
store until they have SPENT a reasonable amount ($100), over a few orders (5),
over a few weeks (10). If they exceed this then ok let them sell.
( numbers in brackets are just examples)
Ok I agree that this prevents the odd person with a box of bits selling them
off, but there are other marketplaces available to do that )
The target is now on my back...go ahead and shoot.........
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | BLUSER_29702 | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 22:05 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 75 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Pokernut writes:
| | In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
-=[snip]=-
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
Having read all these replies I see some reasonable ideas that could be implemented,
and some that are just too over the top.
I dare say I am gonna get a fair bit of stick for this suggestion but hey, we
all have a voice and we all have an opinion.
This thread is about preventing NEW sellers, or very new sellers running scams
and having success..... so why not KISS it.
Simplest thing I can come up with.........Prevent new accounts from opening a
store until they have SPENT a reasonable amount ($100), over a few orders (5),
over a few weeks (10). If they exceed this then ok let them sell.
( numbers in brackets are just examples)
Ok I agree that this prevents the odd person with a box of bits selling them
off, but there are other marketplaces available to do that )
The target is now on my back...go ahead and shoot.........
|
I like this idea, and it ties in with what Elenoe was saying, too. Sellers should
have some experience with the site before they are trusted to represent the BrickLink
brand.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | ABS_bricks | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2014 22:11 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Good post and thanks for being vigilant in sniffing out fraudulent accounts.
What I don't get is, if you use PayPal, don't you get your money back
if the "seller" can't prove they sent you something?
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2014 22:54 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | Good post and thanks for being vigilant in sniffing out fraudulent accounts.
What I don't get is, if you use PayPal, don't you get your money back
if the "seller" can't prove they sent you something?
|
Not if the seller withdrew the funds from his account before the claim was filed.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | jeslego | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2014 23:04 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | Good post and thanks for being vigilant in sniffing out fraudulent accounts.
What I don't get is, if you use PayPal, don't you get your money back
if the "seller" can't prove they sent you something?
|
Not if the seller withdrew the funds from his account before the claim was filed.
|
In a different matter, I filed a "dispute" on Jan 7, but Paypal would not let
me escalate it to a "claim" until Jan 11. When I went to look at my claim a
few minutes ago, the only date that Paypal displays is Jan 7.
Do you know if Paypal is using the "dispute" date or the "claim" date when they
decide if I should get my money back?
thanks,
jes
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | BLUSER_29702 | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2014 23:58 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | Good post and thanks for being vigilant in sniffing out fraudulent accounts.
What I don't get is, if you use PayPal, don't you get your money back
if the "seller" can't prove they sent you something?
|
Not if the seller withdrew the funds from his account before the claim was filed.
|
Is PayPal as bad as they used to be about freezing accounts for long periods
of time over little things? I remember being told to always clear the account
as fast as possible because they would tie up your whole account for weeks or
months.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | maxx3001 | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 05:41 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Pearson writes:
| | In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | Good post and thanks for being vigilant in sniffing out fraudulent accounts.
What I don't get is, if you use PayPal, don't you get your money back
if the "seller" can't prove they sent you something?
|
Not if the seller withdrew the funds from his account before the claim was filed.
|
Is PayPal as bad as they used to be about freezing accounts for long periods
of time over little things? I remember being told to always clear the account
as fast as possible because they would tie up your whole account for weeks or
months.
|
I have always money in my paypal, just to make sure I can buy when I need to.
Taking everything out is the scammers way, maybe by doing this, you are flagged
to be a possible scammer?
Personally I have had no trouble, but have heard stories (long ago).
Maxx
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | ABS_bricks | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 05:21 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | Good post and thanks for being vigilant in sniffing out fraudulent accounts.
What I don't get is, if you use PayPal, don't you get your money back
if the "seller" can't prove they sent you something?
|
Not if the seller withdrew the funds from his account before the claim was filed.
|
That really stinks, I thought PayPal required a credit card that they could
retract the funds from in the event there was a dispute. I guess they just use
a stolen credit card. PayPal should keep a freeze on new accounts.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Jilly0722 | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 08:11 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | Good post and thanks for being vigilant in sniffing out fraudulent accounts.
What I don't get is, if you use PayPal, don't you get your money back
if the "seller" can't prove they sent you something?
|
Not if the seller withdrew the funds from his account before the claim was filed.
|
That really stinks, I thought PayPal required a credit card that they could
retract the funds from in the event there was a dispute. I guess they just use
a stolen credit card. PayPal should keep a freeze on new accounts.
|
Paypal does not let newbee's withdraw the funds in fact they freeze them
until they verify the item was delivered by a verifiable delivery service.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 08:55 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Jilly0722 writes:
| | Paypal does not let newbee's withdraw the funds in fact they freeze them
until they verify the item was delivered by a verifiable delivery service.
|
That statement is too broad. Per PayPal's own rules, funds on hold CAN be
released before or without such verification. Verification is just one way the
funds can be released. And it is easy enough to get around those hold rules altogether.
Thor
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Jilly0722 | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 09:06 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, Jilly0722 writes:
| | Paypal does not let newbee's withdraw the funds in fact they freeze them
until they verify the item was delivered by a verifiable delivery service.
|
That statement is too broad. Per PayPal's own rules, funds on hold CAN be
released before or without such verification. Verification is just one way the
funds can be released. And it is easy enough to get around those hold rules altogether.
Thor
|
Yes there are flaws in any system. I have been using paypal for years with over
500K in transactions and have only had 1 chargeback due to me being duped by
a buyer to send a item to a alternate address by a US buyer nonetheless. (not
following paypals selling guidelines) I ONLY USE PAYPAL for all of my electronic
payment transactions.
Jill
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 08:16 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | Good post and thanks for being vigilant in sniffing out fraudulent accounts.
What I don't get is, if you use PayPal, don't you get your money back
if the "seller" can't prove they sent you something?
|
Not if the seller withdrew the funds from his account before the claim was filed.
|
That really stinks, I thought PayPal required a credit card that they could
retract the funds from in the event there was a dispute. I guess they just use
a stolen credit card. PayPal should keep a freeze on new accounts.
|
PayPal has started putting a holding period on SOME new accounts whereby payments
cannot be withdrawn for X number of days. But it is very easy to lift this hold,
and it does not apply to all new accounts. I won't educate the scammers by
telling how to lift this hold, but there are at least several easy ways to quickly
get around it.
I have always said that PayPal does NOT protect you from a determined intelligent
scammer. On the contrary, PayPal ENABLES such scams. A good scammer knows how
to use PayPal's rules to facilitate their scams.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Jilly0722 | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 08:28 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, ABS_bricks writes:
| | Good post and thanks for being vigilant in sniffing out fraudulent accounts.
What I don't get is, if you use PayPal, don't you get your money back
if the "seller" can't prove they sent you something?
|
Not if the seller withdrew the funds from his account before the claim was filed.
|
That really stinks, I thought PayPal required a credit card that they could
retract the funds from in the event there was a dispute. I guess they just use
a stolen credit card. PayPal should keep a freeze on new accounts.
|
PayPal has started putting a holding period on SOME new accounts whereby payments
cannot be withdrawn for X number of days. But it is very easy to lift this hold,
and it does not apply to all new accounts. I won't educate the scammers by
telling how to lift this hold, but there are at least several easy ways to quickly
get around it.
I have always said that PayPal does NOT protect you from a determined intelligent
scammer. On the contrary, PayPal ENABLES such scams. A good scammer knows how
to use PayPal's rules to facilitate their scams.
Thor
|
Paypal has come a long way in their fraud protection, Feebay even starting to
guarantee that a buyer will get what they purchased. AS long as their protocol
is followed
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 08:49 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Jilly0722 writes:
| |
Paypal has come a long way in their fraud protection, Feebay even starting to
guarantee that a buyer will get what they purchased. AS long as their protocol
is followed
|
PayPal APPEARS to have improved their fraud protection. But it is still quite
easy for an intelligent determined scammer to use PayPal to facilitate their
scams. Quickly looking at PayPal's new hold rules revealed to me at least
three big holes a smart scammer could use to get around those rules and complete
their scams. There are other ways too. Again, I am not about to educate the scammers
but explaining all the ways you can be scammed even when using PayPal. I just
think it is naive or foolish of buyers to think that PayPal is foolproof and
will always protect them. I also think it is misleading of PayPal to represent
as much. In fact, PayPal is smart enough NOT to make that 100% guarantee. They
heavily promote their buyer protection policies, but stop just short of claiming
they work all the time. I take this as an admission by PayPal itself that scammers
can still use PayPal to enable their scams. If PayPal were confident their fraud
protection policies worked every time, they would GUARANTEE you a full refund
if you did not get what you paid for. There are reasons they do not offer you
such a guarantee.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | bb138026 | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 06:41 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
We probably all agree that something should be done, this is a very serious problem
hurting BrickLink's reputation and buyers.
Sadly, any kind of verification process or minimum feedback can be tricked (scammers
placing dummy orders with each other?). Strict controls will never work, we need
a more intelligent solution.
Bricklink should have a clever algorithm in place, watching over inventories
and orders. It's not hard to recognize suspicious activiy by any algorithm
with access to all of BrickLink's data. Believe me, if a human can recognize
a scam, so can an algorithm, and far more so.
I'm a software programmer, and if BrickLink were open-source, I would gladly
write and submit such a patch. This is easy.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | bb433833 | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 09:39 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Great post
As a new seller I am keen to get a good standing in this community, I offer a
5% coupon for positive feedback received and I always send out my packages in
good time to keep my customers happy.
This is my way of building a rapport with my customers, and building up a good
feedback score. Anything that helps to improve security regarding seller's
stores and buyers buying experiences I welcome with open arms. I agree it is
very easy indeed to open a store and perhaps if someone set up a store with the
sole intention of scamming it could be done quite easily.
I don't like the idea of credit card checking since I don't use one myself,
never had one and wouldn't get one just to perform this. Would it be a better
idea to have to do a $5 (for example) transfer to BrickLink via a direct bank
transfer? Since this would provide BrickLink with all the necessary details regarding
the person setting up the store and have it held by BL for say 6 months, after
which it would be returned. Also a photocopy of passport/driving licence could
be sent to provide proof of address. These precautions are used by internet poker
sites and they are very very careful with their security measures.
If I was made to provide these details to keep my store open and obtain a 'trusted
seller' badge I would do it straight away.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 09:55 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| There are legal risks to BrickLink if it adopts any verification system BrickLink
itself controls or operates. Right now, BL tries to avoid that legal risk by
neatly saying, in effect: "You are on your own. Caveat emptor. We are not responsible
for and cannot vouch for any seller or buyer on this site. Use this site and
deal with its members at your own risk."
So, legally, once BL starts doing more to vet or verify sellers for the express
purpose of making and promoting this site as more safe, BL ironically subjects
itself to more risk and responsibility if anyone slips through the cracks. It
may, in fact, be less risky - legally - for BL to allow a third party to do this
vetting or verification.
To complicate things even further, however, BL already does some vetting and
verification and other things to prevent fraud(1), all of which are relied upon
by BL's members - which BL knows and fully intends. So, legally, it could
already be argued that despite the disclaimer in its ToS, BL has already assumed
some risk and responsibility for protecting its members. If in for a penny, perhaps
it might as well be in for a pound.
Thor
(1) These include the NSS system, problem member reporting system, and Admin
suspending suspicious stores.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | bb433833 | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 11:12 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | There are legal risks to BrickLink if it adopts any verification system BrickLink
itself controls or operates. Right now, BL tries to avoid that legal risk by
neatly saying, in effect: "You are on your own. Caveat emptor. We are not responsible
for and cannot vouch for any seller or buyer on this site. Use this site and
deal with its members at your own risk."
So, legally, once BL starts doing more to vet or verify sellers for the express
purpose of making and promoting this site as more safe, BL ironically subjects
itself to more risk and responsibility if anyone slips through the cracks. It
may, in fact, be less risky - legally - for BL to allow a third party to do this
vetting or verification.
To complicate things even further, however, BL already does some vetting and
verification and other things to prevent fraud(1), all of which are relied upon
by BL's members - which BL knows and fully intends. So, legally, it could
already be argued that despite the disclaimer in its ToS, BL has already assumed
some risk and responsibility for protecting its members. If in for a penny, perhaps
it might as well be in for a pound.
Thor
(1) These include the NSS system, problem member reporting system, and Admin
suspending suspicious stores.
|
A minefield indeed then
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 13:21 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | There are legal risks to BrickLink if it adopts any verification system BrickLink
itself controls or operates. Right now, BL tries to avoid that legal risk by
neatly saying, in effect: "You are on your own. Caveat emptor. We are not responsible
for and cannot vouch for any seller or buyer on this site. Use this site and
deal with its members at your own risk."
So, legally, once BL starts doing more to vet or verify sellers for the express
purpose of making and promoting this site as more safe, BL ironically subjects
itself to more risk and responsibility if anyone slips through the cracks. It
may, in fact, be less risky - legally - for BL to allow a third party to do this
vetting or verification.
To complicate things even further, however, BL already does some vetting and
verification and other things to prevent fraud(1), all of which are relied upon
by BL's members - which BL knows and fully intends. So, legally, it could
already be argued that despite the disclaimer in its ToS, BL has already assumed
some risk and responsibility for protecting its members. If in for a penny, perhaps
it might as well be in for a pound.
|
While it is true that Bricklink should not want to imply a guarantee against
all sorts of undesired seller behaviours, or problems in interactions, the issue
here is prevention of fraud against buyers.
I think the OP solution is focused on that. Having the verification suggested
would discourage attempts at criminal activity, and could help scammed buyers
get justice.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2014 23:44 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | There are legal risks to BrickLink if it adopts any verification system BrickLink
itself controls or operates. Right now, BL tries to avoid that legal risk by
neatly saying, in effect: "You are on your own. Caveat emptor. We are not responsible
for and cannot vouch for any seller or buyer on this site. Use this site and
deal with its members at your own risk."
So, legally, once BL starts doing more to vet or verify sellers for the express
purpose of making and promoting this site as more safe, BL ironically subjects
itself to more risk and responsibility if anyone slips through the cracks. It
may, in fact, be less risky - legally - for BL to allow a third party to do this
vetting or verification.
To complicate things even further, however, BL already does some vetting and
verification and other things to prevent fraud(1), all of which are relied upon
by BL's members - which BL knows and fully intends. So, legally, it could
already be argued that despite the disclaimer in its ToS, BL has already assumed
some risk and responsibility for protecting its members. If in for a penny, perhaps
it might as well be in for a pound.
Thor
(1) These include the NSS system, problem member reporting system, and Admin
suspending suspicious stores.
|
Firstly, I believe you can't be held liable as a company if all you did was
verify the seller's information. BL is not guaranteeing that the seller
is selling what they say they are, and that they will deliver. BL would only
verify that the person you are dealing with is real, their name and address are
real, they exist at a real place, and they have a real PayPal or bank account.
Secondly, the systems you mention with (1) are all fine, except for the "take-and-run"
scam seller. Those things take time to catch up, and the scam seller has long
since made off with the money.
Scam sellers hide behind anonymity. Verifying a person removes complete anonymity.
Why are people so against simply verifying a person really is a person?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2014 08:46 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 84 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | There are legal risks to BrickLink if it adopts any verification system BrickLink
itself controls or operates. Right now, BL tries to avoid that legal risk by
neatly saying, in effect: "You are on your own. Caveat emptor. We are not responsible
for and cannot vouch for any seller or buyer on this site. Use this site and
deal with its members at your own risk."
So, legally, once BL starts doing more to vet or verify sellers for the express
purpose of making and promoting this site as more safe, BL ironically subjects
itself to more risk and responsibility if anyone slips through the cracks. It
may, in fact, be less risky - legally - for BL to allow a third party to do this
vetting or verification.
To complicate things even further, however, BL already does some vetting and
verification and other things to prevent fraud(1), all of which are relied upon
by BL's members - which BL knows and fully intends. So, legally, it could
already be argued that despite the disclaimer in its ToS, BL has already assumed
some risk and responsibility for protecting its members. If in for a penny, perhaps
it might as well be in for a pound.
Thor
(1) These include the NSS system, problem member reporting system, and Admin
suspending suspicious stores.
|
Firstly, I believe you can't be held liable as a company if all you did was
verify the seller's information. BL is not guaranteeing that the seller
is selling what they say they are, and that they will deliver. BL would only
verify that the person you are dealing with is real, their name and address are
real, they exist at a real place, and they have a real PayPal or bank account.
Secondly, the systems you mention with (1) are all fine, except for the "take-and-run"
scam seller. Those things take time to catch up, and the scam seller has long
since made off with the money.
Scam sellers hide behind anonymity. Verifying a person removes complete anonymity.
Why are people so against simply verifying a person really is a person?
|
I am not against this idea. Actually, I support it. I am just pointing out some
of the possible legal and business considerations BL may have. And while verification
may help, I don't think it will be foolproof. Of course, it does not have
to be. Preventing some scammers is better than doing nothing. But by adopting
a verification system AND promoting it as making the site more safe, you induce
members to rely on it. Members who rely on it to their detriment may hold BL
at least partly responsible. Still, on balance, I think it is worthwhile for
BL to pursue. But that is a business judgment call BL will have to make for itself.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | bb138026 | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2014 11:56 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Scam sellers hide behind anonymity. Verifying a person removes complete anonymity.
Why are people so against simply verifying a person really is a person?
|
And how do you propose we do that?
Scammers are clever enough to use Photoshop/Gimp and create fake scans of whatever
official document may be asked. Do you have a way of looking that up in government
databases?
All this would just give buyers a false sense of security.
BrickLink should have preventive mechanisms in *code* to limit the abuse, preventing
further orders of being placed in a store whenever things appear suspicious (until
a human review is done).
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2014 10:43 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Stragus writes:
| | In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Scam sellers hide behind anonymity. Verifying a person removes complete anonymity.
Why are people so against simply verifying a person really is a person?
|
And how do you propose we do that?
Scammers are clever enough to use Photoshop/Gimp and create fake scans of whatever
official document may be asked. Do you have a way of looking that up in government
databases?
All this would just give buyers a false sense of security.
BrickLink should have preventive mechanisms in *code* to limit the abuse, preventing
further orders of being placed in a store whenever things appear suspicious (until
a human review is done).
|
Did you not read my original post? I'll list again below just to save you
the effort of clicking the first post:
You can verify information provided by an account holder with the company that
holds the account when you have a transaction with them. A $5 transaction allows
you to access the account information of the account holder. That verifies the
name and address on the Bricklink store match the name and address on the account.
That verifies the person exists, because a bank would not issue an account to
someone without verifying id.
Secondly, you MAIL a card with a special code to enter into BL in order to complete
the verification process. This proves the person registering to sell is actually
at that address.
Yes, there will be some faults and exceptions. But if you can scare away 7 out
of 10 scammers because of the above, it is well worthwhile.
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2014 23:46 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Bricks.n.Pieces writes:
| | Great post
As a new seller I am keen to get a good standing in this community, I offer a
5% coupon for positive feedback received and I always send out my packages in
good time to keep my customers happy.
This is my way of building a rapport with my customers, and building up a good
feedback score. Anything that helps to improve security regarding seller's
stores and buyers buying experiences I welcome with open arms. I agree it is
very easy indeed to open a store and perhaps if someone set up a store with the
sole intention of scamming it could be done quite easily.
I don't like the idea of credit card checking since I don't use one myself,
never had one and wouldn't get one just to perform this.Would it be a better
idea to have to do a $5 (for example) transfer to BrickLink via a direct bank
transfer? Since this would provide BrickLink with all the necessary details regarding
the person setting up the store and have it held by BL for say 6 months, after
which it would be returned. Also a photocopy of passport/driving licence could
be sent to provide proof of address. These precautions are used by internet poker
sites and they are very very careful with their security measures.
If I was made to provide these details to keep my store open and obtain a 'trusted
seller' badge I would do it straight away.
|
This is why I suggested in the original posting that it could also be a PayPal
payment. You need to have a PayPal account to sell on Bricklink, why not require
a $5 payment upfront to verify the seller is legit?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | therobo | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2014 05:32 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 87 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | In Suggestions, Bricks.n.Pieces writes:
| | Great post
As a new seller I am keen to get a good standing in this community, I offer a
5% coupon for positive feedback received and I always send out my packages in
good time to keep my customers happy.
This is my way of building a rapport with my customers, and building up a good
feedback score. Anything that helps to improve security regarding seller's
stores and buyers buying experiences I welcome with open arms. I agree it is
very easy indeed to open a store and perhaps if someone set up a store with the
sole intention of scamming it could be done quite easily.
I don't like the idea of credit card checking since I don't use one myself,
never had one and wouldn't get one just to perform this.Would it be a better
idea to have to do a $5 (for example) transfer to BrickLink via a direct bank
transfer? Since this would provide BrickLink with all the necessary details regarding
the person setting up the store and have it held by BL for say 6 months, after
which it would be returned. Also a photocopy of passport/driving licence could
be sent to provide proof of address. These precautions are used by internet poker
sites and they are very very careful with their security measures.
If I was made to provide these details to keep my store open and obtain a 'trusted
seller' badge I would do it straight away.
|
This is why I suggested in the original posting that it could also be a PayPal
payment. You need to have a PayPal account to sell on Bricklink, why not require
a $5 payment upfront to verify the seller is legit?
|
You DON'T need to have a PayPal account to sell on BrickLink.
| |
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2014 10:46 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, therobo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | In Suggestions, Bricks.n.Pieces writes:
| | Great post
As a new seller I am keen to get a good standing in this community, I offer a
5% coupon for positive feedback received and I always send out my packages in
good time to keep my customers happy.
This is my way of building a rapport with my customers, and building up a good
feedback score. Anything that helps to improve security regarding seller's
stores and buyers buying experiences I welcome with open arms. I agree it is
very easy indeed to open a store and perhaps if someone set up a store with the
sole intention of scamming it could be done quite easily.
I don't like the idea of credit card checking since I don't use one myself,
never had one and wouldn't get one just to perform this.Would it be a better
idea to have to do a $5 (for example) transfer to BrickLink via a direct bank
transfer? Since this would provide BrickLink with all the necessary details regarding
the person setting up the store and have it held by BL for say 6 months, after
which it would be returned. Also a photocopy of passport/driving licence could
be sent to provide proof of address. These precautions are used by internet poker
sites and they are very very careful with their security measures.
If I was made to provide these details to keep my store open and obtain a 'trusted
seller' badge I would do it straight away.
|
This is why I suggested in the original posting that it could also be a PayPal
payment. You need to have a PayPal account to sell on Bricklink, why not require
a $5 payment upfront to verify the seller is legit?
|
You DON'T need to have a PayPal account to sell on BrickLink.
| |
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
Please then, tell me how you pay your BL sellers fees by PayPal if you don't
need to have a PayPal account to sell???
Do you people NOT READ?????
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=38
"How to Pay - BrickLink accepts payments only via PayPal.com"
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | RobErNat | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2014 11:07 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | In Suggestions, therobo writes:
|
| | | |
You DON'T need to have a PayPal account to sell on BrickLink.
| |
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
Please then, tell me how you pay your BL sellers fees by PayPal if you don't
need to have a PayPal account to sell???
Do you people NOT READ?????
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=38
"How to Pay - BrickLink accepts payments only via PayPal.com"
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
You don't actually need a PP account to send money through Paypal.
The receiver needs a Paypal account. The rest can be done through creditcard
or bankaccount for example.
So yes BL needs to be paid on it's PP account, but that doesn't oblige
the sender to have one as well (check PP for details).
Cheers, Eric
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | therobo | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2014 13:16 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | In Suggestions, therobo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | In Suggestions, Bricks.n.Pieces writes:
| | Great post
As a new seller I am keen to get a good standing in this community, I offer a
5% coupon for positive feedback received and I always send out my packages in
good time to keep my customers happy.
This is my way of building a rapport with my customers, and building up a good
feedback score. Anything that helps to improve security regarding seller's
stores and buyers buying experiences I welcome with open arms. I agree it is
very easy indeed to open a store and perhaps if someone set up a store with the
sole intention of scamming it could be done quite easily.
I don't like the idea of credit card checking since I don't use one myself,
never had one and wouldn't get one just to perform this.Would it be a better
idea to have to do a $5 (for example) transfer to BrickLink via a direct bank
transfer? Since this would provide BrickLink with all the necessary details regarding
the person setting up the store and have it held by BL for say 6 months, after
which it would be returned. Also a photocopy of passport/driving licence could
be sent to provide proof of address. These precautions are used by internet poker
sites and they are very very careful with their security measures.
If I was made to provide these details to keep my store open and obtain a 'trusted
seller' badge I would do it straight away.
|
This is why I suggested in the original posting that it could also be a PayPal
payment. You need to have a PayPal account to sell on Bricklink, why not require
a $5 payment upfront to verify the seller is legit?
|
You DON'T need to have a PayPal account to sell on BrickLink.
| |
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
Please then, tell me how you pay your BL sellers fees by PayPal if you don't
need to have a PayPal account to sell???
Do you people NOT READ?????
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=38
"How to Pay - BrickLink accepts payments only via PayPal.com"
|
Someone else with a Paypal account can pay the fees for you.
| |
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Rolf | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2014 13:44 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, therobo writes:
| | Someone else with a Paypal account can pay the fees for you.
|
Not when you have credit card. You can pay anyone via paypal without even having
an account in paypal. You need account just to GET payments.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | therobo | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2014 13:47 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rolf writes:
| | In Suggestions, therobo writes:
| | Someone else with a Paypal account can pay the fees for you.
|
Not when you have credit card.
|
Even when you have a credit card, someone else can pay your fees
| | You can pay anyone via paypal without even having
an account in paypal. You need account just to GET payments.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Rolf | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2014 13:52 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, therobo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rolf writes:
| | In Suggestions, therobo writes:
| | Someone else with a Paypal account can pay the fees for you.
|
Not when you have credit card.
|
Even when you have a credit card, someone else can pay your fees
| | You can pay anyone via paypal without even having
an account in paypal. You need account just to GET payments.
|
|
Lol that's true too.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Locutis | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2014 21:13 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 85 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rolf writes:
| | In Suggestions, therobo writes:
| | Someone else with a Paypal account can pay the fees for you.
|
Not when you have credit card. You can pay anyone via paypal without even having
an account in paypal. You need account just to GET payments.
|
Okay, but that means that you have a way of paying a $5 charge, and BrickLink
would have a way of verifying the information.
Either way, technically speaking to sell on Bricklink you have to be a real person
to pay the fees, using some form of real payment. If a scammer never intends
to pay the fees, they can get around that part of the check.
By verifying an incoming payment FIRST before allowing a seller's account,
and by sending a code in the mail, you narrow down the list of scammers by a
lot.
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canada, Manitoba
USA, North Carolina
United Kingdom, England
Belgium, Flemish Brabant
United Kingdom, Scotland
Netherlands, Utrecht
Germany, Berlin