41–50 of 109 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or, you know, literally any Canadian payment processor
But the article states the problem are the funds are going to a US bank. If believed, she could just have the funds go to a Canadian bank and the problem is solved. Doesn’t really have anything to do with Square.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
30 seconds on Google suggests Payfirma, Moneris, and TD Merchant Services, all headquartered in Canada. I haven't deep-dived on any of them, so those specific ones may not be suitable. But Canadian banks exist, and Canadian payment processors exist. This can't be hard.
They probably also suck by comparison. But she should move to one of them now that she's aware of the problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
30 seconds on Google suggests Payfirma, Moneris, and TD Merchant Services, all headquartered in Canada. I haven't deep-dived on any of them, so those specific ones may not be suitable. But Canadian banks exist, and Canadian payment processors exist. This can't be hard.
They probably also suck by comparison. But she should move to one of them now that she's aware of the problem.
They need to just give her the $14k immediately and then eat it if it's a problem. Stop processing the transactions going forward or until it's sorted out, but do not steal her money. Also, I found this distasteful: "I want to clarify that Square is not experiencing a technical glitch. While I cannot speak with you about Monica's individual case, I can tell you that Square's Customer Success team spoke with Monica ye…
If the question is legal liability for violating sanctions, releasing the $14K could put them on the hook for much more than $14K in liability.
It's beyond time to end the embargo against Cuba.
And it's beyond time Cuba end it's 2 ounce coffee rations every 15 days for Cuban citizens. That wouldn't last me 15 minutes. per Wiki: "Domestic distribution is currently limited to two ounces of coffee rations every 15 days for Cuban citizens.[13]
Why do you think that is now?
> "I was kind of shocked and mad, because we're a Canadian company using Cuban goods bought and sold in Canada," Using an American payment company and an American bank, both of which are subject to American laws and aren't going to risk breaking a trade embargo, regardless of whether this particular case is 100% legal or not. Also not sure why the headline says Square Canada when the article makes it clear that it is…
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-92-584/p...
I used to (nearly 20 years ago) roast coffee in Whitehorse, Yukon Territory Canada, and folks from Alaska would often stop in the shop. People that bought Cuban coffee often requested it be rebagged and just labelled “coffee” for about the same reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And it's beyond time Cuba end it's 2 ounce coffee rations every 15 days for Cuban citizens. That wouldn't last me 15 minutes. per Wiki: "Domestic distribution is currently limited to two ounces of coffee rations every 15 days for Cuban citizens.[13]
the article you cite also states "the total number of hectares where coffee is harvested in Cuba has fallen from 170,000 hectares (420,000 acres) in 1961 to 28,000 hectares (69,000 acres) in 2013." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_production_in_Cuba ) Why do you think that is now?
The political context and nationalisation of the industry led to much-reduced production."
followed by another whopper: " With the collapse of the Soviet bloc, Cuba lost 80% of its export trade." https://www.perfectdailygrind.com/2018/09/exploring-cubas-co...
Square should definitely set this right ASAP she's not doing anything against. I wonder if she had named her stand Canada Beans, would this have happened? The nerve
International law is wildly complicated and full of landmines. I suspect Square would strongly prefer to just disburse $14,000 and set things right. Unfortunately the cost of doing so potentially involves prison time for anyone who made that happen.
Even something as innocuous-sounding as explaining to the merchant why they can’t release their funds is potentially grounds for an arrest. Whenever you see an article or blog post about Square, Stripe, Venmo, PayPal, or any other financial company having a pissed-off customer who’s owed money and can’t even get a support person to explain what’s wrong, the answer is virtually inevitably OFAC, and there is often literally no legal path forward to make the affected party whole at that point.
Square says it's "working on" getting Mustelier her money back. I feel like, at this point, they ought to simply pay her out of their own pocket. They were the ones who put her money in a bank that was not fit for purpose. Even if they didn't realize this would happen, they've violated their obligation to her, and they need to fix it now, not after a few more months of wrangling.