Recover my transfer?

[TOMBSTONE]

If they are based in NY and refuse to refund the money I would look up NY State Attorney General to file a complaint. Not getting into details,I have had good results even when I was bound by contract. Swords and knives are not illegal here in NY so I don't understand the issue.

 

[DB.Cooper]

In all practicality, people learn about what not to do by learning stories such as this and not by reading the TOS. I learned about Paypal's aversion to gun-related transaction in a similar way. I use ebay, paypal, online brokerages, banks, various software, and I have quit reading TOS or EULA agreements. I've made some transactions over $2000. I doubt that a lot of people can read through these TOSes and understand the various pitfalls. I have more ability and propensity than the average person to understand the minutiae contained in these TOSes but they really weren't written to communicate clearly to the end user but serves more to cover the issuing entity.

No offense but this anecdotal evidence came out as jibberish. Nobody would have to learn from this story if they just took a look at Skrills TOS. It's pretty clear.

 

[craytab]

In all practicality, people learn about what not to do by learning stories such as this and not by reading the TOS. I learned about Paypal's aversion to gun-related transaction in a similar way. I use ebay, paypal, online brokerages, banks, various software, and I have quit reading TOS or EULA agreements. I've made some transactions over $2000. I doubt that a lot of people can read through these TOSes and understand the various pitfalls. I have more ability and propensity than the average person to understand the minutiae contained in these TOSes but they really weren't written to communicate clearly to the end user but serves more to cover the issuing entity.

No offense but this anecdotal evidence came out as jibberish. Nobody would have to learn from this story if they just took a look at Skrills TOS. It's pretty clear.

Couldn't agree more. I think describing it as gibberish is giving it too much credit.

If you don't read the TOS it means you don't care about the consequences of violating the TOS. As long as you are fine with that, go for it. But don't complain later when the poop hits the fan.

 

[SaintlyBrees]

FWIW, one can find out all about Skrill with a simple Google search. No TOS reading needed. All in plain English.

I would have certainly looked up someone like this before I would have used their services. It only makes sense to do so and I do a bit of research with all significant transactions where the parties are previously unknown to me. Skrill has a bad rep and I found that out in less than 30 seconds.

Why people don't protect themselves by understanding what they are doing and with who is beyond me. But - it is common as we often see here in GBU.

Better sources are available than Wikipedia, but here is a quickie quote from them nonetheless (other sources match):

According to a Better Business Bureau review, Skrill has a very poor reputation with fraudulent behaviour. The review noted 58 complaints submitted by victimized users, with most of the complaints citing unauthorized and fraudulent charges, poor and unreachable customer service, and deceptive selling practices, almost all of which appear to be linked to sudden account freezes and withheld funds. Many customer reviews are favorable, for example in a 2011 survey by the online seller news blog eCommerce Bytes, Skrill received the second highest ranking out of all payment services.

 

[craytab]

I would not consider using a money service named after a street word for money.

 

[Rey HRH]

No offense but this anecdotal evidence came out as jibberish. Nobody would have to learn from this story if they just took a look at Skrills TOS. It's pretty clear.

The point that "Skrill" doesn't allow weapons-related transactions was made in this thread regardless of whether the original post is considered "jibberish."

Couldn't agree more. I think describing it as gibberish is giving it too much credit.

If you don't read the TOS it means you don't care about the consequences of violating the TOS. As long as you are fine with that, go for it. But don't complain later when the poop hits the fan.

You're mixing two issues together: 1) the most common way people learn of the critical touch points of any service or product they use (and I, for one, devour user manuals) and 2) people complaining after the fact for incurring the consequences of violating a TOS which they have not read. One doesn't follow the other. Me pointing out that most people learn about TOS violations outside of actually reading the TOS does not mean I support complainants after they get hit with the consequences of their TOS violations.

One could argue that Skrill is unconscionably using such clauses to generate revenue. It reminds me of several class action lawsuits in the past where banks were found guilty of charging excessive bank fees on overdrawn accounts or late payments. Those fees were definitely detailed out in agreements that customers accepted. But the fact that such things could be found and read in agreements were insufficient to place the burden of responsibility solely on the consumer and their access to being able to read the agreement.

 

[Rey HRH]

Here's what I could find about Skrill's TOS:

11.1. It is strictly forbidden to send or receive payments as consideration for the sale or supply of: Tobacco products Prescription drugs Drugs and drug paraphernalia Weapons (including without limitation, knives, guns, firearms or ammunition) Satellite and cable TV descramblers Pornography, adult material, material which incites violence, hatred, racism or which is considered obscene Government IDs and licences including replicas and novelty items and any counterfeit products Unlicensed or illegal lotteries or gambling services (including without limitation the use of or participation in illegal gambling houses) Unregistered charity services Items which encourage or facilitate illegal activities Prepaid debit cards or other stored value cards that are not associated with a particular merchant and are not limited to purchases of particular products or services Third party processing or payment aggregation products or services Multi-level marketing, pyramid selling or ponzi schemes, matrix programmes or other “get rich quick” schemes or high yield investment programmes Goods or services that infringe the intellectual property rights of a third party. Un-coded/miscoded gaming Timeshares or property reservation payments (On and Off Plan)

The lack of sufficient punctuation marks is horrid and makes for a case of being incomprehensible even if read. Do they mean you can buy tobacco products, prescription drugs, and drug paraphernalia in separate transactions but not all at once together? (And I'm simply making a point, not being obtuse.)

11.2. It is strictly forbidden to make payments to or to receive payments from persons or entities offering illegal gambling services,

11.4. It is strictly forbidden to use your Skrill Account for any illegal purposes

It appears they are simply doing a "CYA" and covering their liability for facilitating any illegal transactions. They don't want to be deemed as having the responsibility of ensuring whether the buyer of tobacco is considered of legal age or whether the "weapons" are legal to be sent to the receiver's location, etc. Skrill doesn't want to be identified as an arbitrator of sorts. Sending an "innocent" picture into the United States that may be considered as "pornography" in another country (such as maybe a woman showing a bare midriff) would be a case in point that Skrill doesn't want to be entangled. "Adult material," what the heck's adult material? "War and Peace" would be adult material versus children's material, people should lose their money for trying to buy a copy of "War and Peace?"

As somebody else said, I'm thankful to the OP for the heads up about Skrill.

As for the OP, he was trying to buy a sword but is it a weapon? Couldn't it be a ceremonial decorative sword made more valuable by certain aspects of its authentic attributes? There's a whole lot more homicides in the United States committed with baseball bats than katanas; shouldn't this mean you cannot buy baseball bats using skrill? Can you buy kitchen knives through Skrill? What if this sword besides being a ceremonial decoration is used in the ceremonial slicing of watermelon or champagne bottles?

 

[Esav Benyamin]

What if this sword besides being a ceremonial decoration is used in the ceremonial slicing of watermelon or champagne bottles?

Champagne sabres are blunt.

 

[craytab]

The lack of sufficient punctuation marks is horrid and makes for a case of being incomprehensible even if read.

You wouldn't know there was horrible punctuation in the TOS unless you read the TOS :thumbup:

And yes, I agree it is atrocious. Yet another reason not to use such a service and then complain about it after you get screwed. Hell, if I did such a thing I would tell anyone about it out of simple embarrassment.

If anyone wants to hand over 2 grand to a money service named after a slang word for money my advice would be to read the TOS first. Rocket science it is not.

 

[JohnWE]

The folks at Skrill should have used some of their funds to hire an attorney to draw up their TOS.

There's enough holes there to drive what they would probably consider an illegally paid for truck through them...

 

[magnumb]

I have had no problems with PayPal and have found no need to look elsewhere. That the OP did and failed to review Skrill as thoroughly as possible, it became both unfortunate and quite costly for him (not just financially, but time/effort and stress included). That all others should have by now benefitted greatly by the OP's post and obvious regrets and frustrations, that fact and those realizations can be the one very positive outcome of this entire situation.

Whether anyone else on the planet would have approached and entered this particular transaction as did the OP, is now neither here nor there and all comments other than supportive one's (especially after the entire spectrum of 'you should have' or 'how could you have' comments posted), seem conspicuously redundant and for whatever reason.....a bit self-serving, especially since there are only so many ways to tell a guy that 'he f..... up'.......... Many of the posts in this thread offered great, useful thoughtful suggestions that were respectfully presented and were worth reading. Several were presented as if the OP's decision was a personal affront to them and decided that 'talking down' to the OP was somehow OK and justifiable. That's not unexpected to some degree as this is the 'net, but this thread certainly highlights when 'enough is enough'. ' Beatin' the dead horse'.....in spades.

Heck, if a member posted 6 or 7 times in a single thread, essentially disparaging me and or my choices in every single one of their posts, I'd likely take much more offense to being targeted than has the OP. What's that 'ole wives tale about a snapper not releasin' it's grip (on non-edible/desirable objects) until he hears thunder or lightening strikes...? Whether true or not, I have always wondered, if true, what could possibly make that 'ole snapper so mean, stubborn and unrelenting....

Good luck to the OP and all others that might have wished that they gone a different way in whatever situation has caused them to reconsider prior decisions. I can't claim that I haven't regretted decisions in my life, whether monies (any sum, as that's all relative) were involved or not. What I do know is that I can certainly remember each and every 'failing' and continued and reworded posts/comments at 'helping' me to remember these 'failings' that same day or a few days apart between attempts, especially from the same person, would be confusing and disconcerting to me, at best. Confusing and disconcerting because of our 'members=family' mantra. We either are or we aren't.