201–210 of 396 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> something sane like a bank transfer FTFY. Zero fees, zero megacorps taking their cut, zero social graphs in the US growing a few extra tuples
Not viable in the US, as others have pointed out. What we've got are Google Wallet, checks, and a variety of smaller services (Venmo, etc).
Edit: Yes
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US, e-deposit of checks is a passable option to avoid fees. Many banks will take a check deposit by scan or phone camera now, so you can just have someone write a paper check and send the image immediately and deposit it that way. It's still pretty high-friction, not something you'd typically want to do with a customer, but a reasonable alternative to bank transfer if you don't want to pay the $50.
Google Wallet is significantly lower friction than writing out and mobile-depositing a check, at least in my experience.
Had the same issue last month after reciving a $3000 bug bounty. PP limited my account I uploaded a copy of my id, bing -> banned. However: After calling them, they told me to create a new account and verify it with the CC and bankaccount (that were in old acc). And as soon everything was verified they trasfered the money to the new account. So apparently it seems not to be that difficult to get your money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US, e-deposit of checks is a passable option to avoid fees. Many banks will take a check deposit by scan or phone camera now, so you can just have someone write a paper check and send the image immediately and deposit it that way. It's still pretty high-friction, not something you'd typically want to do with a customer, but a reasonable alternative to bank transfer if you don't want to pay the $50.
> In the US, e-deposit of checks is a passable option to avoid fees. My bank (credit union) charges a $2 fee for each check I write, regardless of how or where it's deposited. Yes, it's cheaper than a bank transfer, but checks still aren't fee-free for everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So I've kept off with getting a paypal account, but for many years I've paid for things through paypal, i.e. some webstore that uses paypal as their payment processer. I used to be able to do this without an account, but just a few weeks ago I tried buying something from a store, and the paypal page would simply not let me just enter my credit card information. It required me to either log in or create a new account.…
They have a limit on the amount you can spend overall with any particular credit card without a PayPal account. I want to say it's $2500 or somewhere around there. I ran into this problem a while back and it took some research to figure out why my card with funds was being declined.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not viable in the US, as others have pointed out. What we've got are Google Wallet, checks, and a variety of smaller services (Venmo, etc).
Isn't Venmo now owned by PayPal? Edit: Yes
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google Wallet is significantly lower friction than writing out and mobile-depositing a check, at least in my experience.
Last i checked the android app refuses to run on hardware without nfc, even for the features that don't require it. Maybe it's an option if you have the right phone, or if it lets you do payments on desktop. (haven't tried the latter)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US, e-deposit of checks is a passable option to avoid fees. Many banks will take a check deposit by scan or phone camera now, so you can just have someone write a paper check and send the image immediately and deposit it that way. It's still pretty high-friction, not something you'd typically want to do with a customer, but a reasonable alternative to bank transfer if you don't want to pay the $50.
> In the US, e-deposit of checks is a passable option to avoid fees. My bank (credit union) charges a $2 fee for each check I write, regardless of how or where it's deposited. Yes, it's cheaper than a bank transfer, but checks still aren't fee-free for everyone.
I only ever use Paypal as a wrapper around credit card transactions for merchants I trust enough to purchase from, but not necessarily enough to handle my credit card information directly. I can't say I've ever had a problem using them that way.
Now that I think about it, I'm not sure an account is even necessary for my use-case. Maybe I can get away with just deleting it.
I can't think of a legal reason for this policy. Normally, one must be 18 years old to enter into a contract, so the policy of preventing users under 18 from using the service is rational. However, if a user under 18 turns 18 years old during the contract, the contract is "ratified" and becomes valid and enforceable. It's as if they were 18 years old all along. So, there is no legal reason for Paypal to terminate acc…