Pages:
Author

Topic: BitMarket.Eu has closed down - page 44. (Read 204067 times)

sr. member
Activity: 334
Merit: 250
August 28, 2011, 03:28:10 AM
You don't know how that money was deposited onto the account in question. If it was deposited with a (fraudulent) cheque/check on a previously empty account opened with fraudulent ID, then the bank will request your bank to charge back the transfer, as it was funded with an invalid cheque (thus non-existant funds). Though not very likely, I imagine it could also happen closer to our own beds, when I hear how relaxed banks are in some Eastern-European countries.

This won't happen in Eastern-European countries for the very simple reason, that in most accounts there you can't deposit a check, and in those you can, the bank will put the money in your account only after several weeks after you give them the check, during which they will actually receive the money from the bank which issued the check, and only after that happens, they'll credit your account. So you can't deposit a fraudulent check and then transfer the money to someone.

Anyway its hard to believe that anywhere a wire can be reversed because it came from an account where a fraudulent check was deposited. Where did you get such advice from? Are you sure the person who told you this, really fully knows what he is talking about?

I'd imagine in such situation, the bank where the fraudulent check was deposited would have to try to trace the person who deposited it, and if they can't find him, the bank would have to eat the loss. No way I can imagine that someone else can get money from his account grabbed just because he happened to receive a transfer from that account. If that would happen here, he could sue the bank, and would win in any court. At least any European court.

Also: why would the fraudster wire the money from the check to someone, if it would be much simpler for him just to withdraw it from the account in cash and walk away with the cash? If he can make a wire, he can as well just withdraw it. So the story doesn't make sense to me.
sr. member
Activity: 334
Merit: 250
August 28, 2011, 03:05:28 AM
Anything that goes by the name "Sparkasse". I don't know about more expensive accounts, but basic ones tend to need three days, no matter where the transfer goes. (Obviously individual branches may have different rules, but most of them stick to the three-day-transfer rule, as that's how they make their money.)
As far as I know, most "common" banks (Volksbanken, Sparkassen, Landesbanken, ...) take that long. That's been my experience with incoming local transfers, anyway. Since I can't tell which bank the money came from, I don't know any more details, I'm afraid.

Between my accounts (and these are "common" Sparkassen/Landesbanken banks), if ordered before 19:50, they arrive in the other bank next day before 09:10, contrary to what other people say that they take 3 days. So I am interested in figuring out where exactly those mysterious transfers which hide in a black hole for 3 days come from, because I haven't witnessed one so far. Of course if someone orders a transfer on Monday at 21:00 and checks the other bank on Wednesday at 06:30, the transfer won't be there, and he might say "oh look, it takes three days - Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday", but sorry, that's just not counting the days properly, and not knowing that for the bank, after cut-off time is like already next day, so that doesn't count.

sr. member
Activity: 314
Merit: 250
August 26, 2011, 08:18:23 AM
But I don't understand why the Paypal scams are have to be the problem of the trading site?
e.g. because of escrow service I'd say
and customers make their problems to the problems if traders all time... so avoiding them is a good way out

..also paypal is a competitor to bitcoin in many minds here
full member
Activity: 373
Merit: 100
August 26, 2011, 08:12:58 AM
But I don't understand why the Paypal scams are have to be the problem of the trading site? Why don't you tell your users that there is a high risk if they trade bitcoins against Paypal money? Everyone is free to choose what they accept as payment, including the pros and cons.

If you read the thread carefully, you'll notice that Mahkul mentioned that the scams were flooding their support system. Since they're free, they can't just throw money at the problem to make it go away...
It isn't ideal, but until they get the rating system implemented, this is probably the best solution.
newbie
Activity: 17
Merit: 0
August 26, 2011, 05:18:30 AM
No matter what we do, Paypal will never be a safe option for selling Bitcoins. The small percentage of the scammers is really using stolen Paypal accounts. But the nicest people in the world and with 100% positive E-Bay feedback proved to be scammers as well and even more often! And there is nothing we can do to stop them, because they use their own Paypal account and tell Paypal the transactions were not authorized by them. What can you do then - how can we prove that they are not right? And of course Paypal doesn't give a damn about sellers, otherwise they would have introduced some OTP mechanism and there would be no stolen passwords then and no excuses for dumb users who cannot guard their passwords properly or simply are thieves. Why don't they do it even though they are one of the biggest money processing companies in the world? I don't know, but that's pathetic and laughable.
First, let me say that PayPal has an OTP mechanism, at least in Germany, where you can sign in via on SMS OTP. And I am pretty sure that it's not just germany where you can do this. They also sold token generators, not sure if they still sell them. But I don't understand why the Paypal scams have to be the problem of the trading site? Why don't you tell your users that there is a high risk if they trade bitcoins against Paypal money? Everyone is free to choose what they accept as payment, including the pros and cons. A rating system will also likely reduce the amount of scam, while it sure can't prevent it entirely.
On the other hand, I don't like Paypal. Because of their handling with wikileaks, because they freeze money for no reasons (there are serveral cases her in germany), because of the cuban export control, because they are a monopolist, because of various other reasons. I try to avoid Paypal where possible and never used it with bitmarket. So I don't really care Smiley

Within two months BitMarket is going to be transformed into an exchange operating in a similar exchange as Mt. Gox, where users are able to transfer their money directly to us and then trade safely. There will also be a much more advanced login procedure in place (2-step authentication). BitMarket will also become an Irish limited company accepting: EUR, GBP, PLN, USD and CHF. There will also be small fees for using it; however, for our most loyal users that have been supporting us constantly trading will remain free of charge.
I'm an neutral on the first changes. But introducing a fee and excluding "the most loyal users" is plain wrong. You give gifts to the high volume traders who already make some money with the trading and scare away the low volume/one time traders, which are the clients of the high volume traders. How is this fair?
There are two primary reasons I use bitmarket to trade a low amount once in a while:
  • I can use SEPA\local wire transfers
  • It's free of charge

Please exclude at least SEPA/local wire transfer from the fees or keep the fees here at a minimum.

EDIT: When I get around to it I will post all email addresses that were used to scam people.
I also don't think that this is a good idea, because the accounts could be taken back by their owners giving them a bad reputation. It would be better to introduce a rating system.

Flow
member
Activity: 68
Merit: 10
August 25, 2011, 10:53:14 AM
Once the offers are matched, both the seller and the buyer receive emails from admin at bitmarket dot eu asking them to contact each other, so you can be sure he got the message unless our email address is in his spam filter.

We can't allow anyone to cancel their offers manually after the transaction took place, because this way the buyer would have no warranty that they will get their coins in case the seller was going to cheat. You need to email us if you need the transaction cancelled and then we resolve it. I know it's not ideal, but that's the way it is for now.

We are working out the legal issues and once we have everything sorted we will allow transferring money into the exchange, so that the transactions within the exchange are instant. No point in allowing that now and then shutting the exchange down after some tax officer gets onto us. We want to do this right. Also, once we have the legal end of it sorted we are going (more than likely) to act as a limited company with proper terms and conditions so that everyone knows where their money is going.

I was thinking a messaging system within the exchange, but then again, the guy may say he never logged in to read the message so this doesn't really solve the issue.

-DiamondPlus
newbie
Activity: 49
Merit: 0
August 25, 2011, 02:05:58 AM
On a sidenote, everyone keeps saying how safe a wire/bank/SEPA transfer is... Paid or not paid, point finale. BUT, it can just as well be reversed! Although it is a tad more elaborate than charging back with Paypal. Wink I first stumbled upon this when someone from Cote d'Ivoire was trying to scam me when I was selling my car, this person wanted to pay by wire transfer so I thought there was no risk of the money being taken back... Luckily, I discovered in time that it can be taken back! The reason for it is very simple, everything depends on the origin of the money that is used to execute the wire transfer.

You don't know how that money was deposited onto the account in question. If it was deposited with a (fraudulent) cheque/check on a previously empty account opened with fraudulent ID, then the bank will request your bank to charge back the transfer, as it was funded with an invalid cheque (thus non-existant funds). Though not very likely, I imagine it could also happen closer to our own beds, when I hear how relaxed banks are in some Eastern-European countries.
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
August 25, 2011, 01:50:26 AM
I only used Bitmarket.eu for only Paypal  Sad
sr. member
Activity: 275
Merit: 250
August 25, 2011, 01:13:53 AM
Person-to-person transfer costs 1.9% min 1 USD - way too much to be much useful.
http://www.neteller.com/fees/


For some situations/amounts/banks, that could be cheaper than the $30-$40 wire transfer fees someone might have to pay.

Paypal costs 1.9% - 2.9% + $0.30 + cross border payment fee + conversion fee.

Some people say "no, paypal personal transfers are free". Well, paypal has cut myself and many others off from receiving "personal transfers" without fees.

Neteller accounts aren't available in the united states though.
sr. member
Activity: 334
Merit: 250
August 24, 2011, 10:22:00 PM
@ ancow: Welcome Smiley
@ BitMarket admins: How would you feel about adding Neteller as a payment option?
@ BitMarket users: And how would the users feel about that, anyone here interested in using Neteller?

It works like Moneybookers, they're also popular with the poker crowd and also offer a prepaid MasterCard 'Net+' (higher ATM fee & FX rate, but no annual usage fee) to access the funds in the account. It does appear to be a bit more 'global' than Moneybookers. I couldn't find much about chargeback issues, looks promising. Lots of funding options for the account too, a lot more than any other system I've seen before.

Person-to-person transfer costs 1.9% min 1 USD - way too much to be much useful.
http://www.neteller.com/fees/
newbie
Activity: 49
Merit: 0
August 22, 2011, 04:26:56 AM
'Fast' is obviously something very subjective here, fast to me is not "somewhere between 1 to 3 days". If you trade on a real financial exchange, 1 to 3 days delay is a lifetime. Furthermore I don't fancy the idea of refreshing my online banking interface a gazillion times per day to see if that transfer finally came through... With online eWallet services, at least you receive an e-mail notifying you of the incoming transfer.

With Moneybookers it never takes me more than a few hours (waiting for the buyer to respond) to complete a transaction. I don't have the patience to wait around for days to see if the buyer is actually going to buy or not. But, to each his own of course. Smiley

But what will happen with sharp price movements within one (or a few) days? I can already feel a bunch of cancellations coming up / buyers backing out, since at that point prices are moving so much faster than the transactions can be settled.
sr. member
Activity: 395
Merit: 250
August 22, 2011, 03:05:36 AM
@ BitMarket users: And how would the users feel about that, anyone here interested in using Neteller?

I prefer simple SEPA / wire transfer.

Fast enough and either the buyer pays and gets the BTC, or the buyer does not pay and doesn't get the BTC. Dead simple, and as soon as there is a rating system, the buyer has also some more safety on his side!

The buyer already has 100% safety on his side. Seller's BTC get frozen and cannot be taken out. However, the buyer can write the admins with a proof of sending the wire, i.e. Admins can release the BTC. Thus, buyer have absolutely no risk.
However, I'm also looking forward to the rating system Smiley
I hope you can also rate old transactions!!!
hero member
Activity: 574
Merit: 500
Medical Translations for Bitcoins
August 21, 2011, 02:19:56 PM
@ BitMarket users: And how would the users feel about that, anyone here interested in using Neteller?

I prefer simple SEPA / wire transfer.

Fast enough and either the buyer pays and gets the BTC, or the buyer does not pay and doesn't get the BTC. Dead simple, and as soon as there is a rating system, the buyer has also some more safety on his side!
newbie
Activity: 49
Merit: 0
August 21, 2011, 01:26:16 PM
@ ancow: Welcome Smiley
@ BitMarket admins: How would you feel about adding Neteller as a payment option?
@ BitMarket users: And how would the users feel about that, anyone here interested in using Neteller?

It works like Moneybookers, they're also popular with the poker crowd and also offer a prepaid MasterCard 'Net+' (higher ATM fee & FX rate, but no annual usage fee) to access the funds in the account. It does appear to be a bit more 'global' than Moneybookers. I couldn't find much about chargeback issues, looks promising. Lots of funding options for the account too, a lot more than any other system I've seen before.
full member
Activity: 373
Merit: 100
August 21, 2011, 09:13:38 AM
Thank you!
This document is going to come in handy... Smiley
newbie
Activity: 49
Merit: 0
August 21, 2011, 09:01:34 AM
Yeah, so typical of banks. When customers got spoofed recently in Belgium, banks pledged to refund he clients, saying it was a "commercial move", while it is in fact their legal obligation to refund those customers...

Regarding said limits, I have found a European Payments Council document more or less 'clearly' stating these limits:

Quote
1.8
Maximum Execution Time
Originator Banks are obliged to credit the account of a Beneficiary Bank with the amount of the credit transfer within 2 Banking Business Days following the point in time of receipt of the Credit Transfer Instruction, with Beneficiary Banks then required to credit the account of a Beneficiary in accordance with the provisions of the Payment Services Directive.
From 1 January 2012, Originator Banks are obliged to credit the account of a Beneficiary Bank with the amount of the credit transfer within 1 Banking Business Day following the point in time of acceptance in accordance with the provisions of the Payment Services Directive.
The maximum execution time is explained in more detail in section 4.2.3.

Quote
4.2.3
Maximum Execution Time (3)
Originator Banks are obliged to ensure that, where permitted by their Terms and Conditions with Originators, the amount of the credit transfer is credited to the account of the Beneficiary Bank within 2 Banking Business Days following the point in time of receipt of the Credit Transfer Instruction, or otherwise, within 1 Business Day in accordance with the provisions of the Payment Services Directive.
From 1 January 2012, Originator Banks are obliged to ensure that the amount of the Credit Transfer is credited to the account of the Beneficiary Bank within one Banking Business Day following the point in time of receipt of the Credit Transfer Instruction in accordance with the provisions of the Payment Services Directive.
A Beneficiary Bank is obliged to credit the account of the Beneficiary with the amount of the credit transfer in accordance with the provisions of the Payment Services Directive.

Quote
(3) The Payment Services Directive allows an extra day for the execution of paper-initiated credit transfers. The Rulebook currently describes interbank electronic payments only and does not take into account additional time permitted for processing paper-initiated transactions. This is considered to be a matter for each Participant to regulate with its customer in accordance with applicable laws.

So, in theory even local transfers initiated with a paper SEPA transfer form can take 2 days locally and internationally starting next year, but in theory electronic transfers should go through in 1 day, both locally and internationally, starting next year. Until the end of the year, local transfers should go through in 2 days (paper) or 1 day (electronic) max, international should go through in 3 days (paper) or 2 days (electronic) max. But rest assured, plenty of banks are in frequent violation. The problem is, no one is reporting these delays. Cheesy
full member
Activity: 373
Merit: 100
August 21, 2011, 08:35:25 AM
Check your bank communication, most banks communicated these details when they communicated information related to SEPA to their clients initially. Some banks report these regulations or an introduction on their website (example). I'm sure you can also find it on a European website somewhere. As of next year, international SEPA transfer should go through in 1 day max, same as local.
Unfortunately, I already looked over what my bank sent me and even at their websites. This is the most detailed description I can find: https://www.ksk-es.de/privatkunden/banking/sepa/details/index.php?n=%2Fprivatkunden%2Fbanking%2Fsepa%2Fdetails%2F&IFLBSERVERID=IF@@021@@IF
Even this only mentions that there is some sort of upper limit, it does not mention the limit itself. (It's actually a nice feat of marketing - after reading over it, you feel pretty well informed, but you are missing basic information such as timing info.)
newbie
Activity: 49
Merit: 0
August 21, 2011, 08:01:53 AM
Local SEPA transfer should go through in 1 day maximum
That's really nice to know - do you have somewhere I can look this up?
Check your bank communication, most banks communicated these details when they communicated information related to SEPA to their clients initially. Some banks report these regulations or an introduction on their website (example). I'm sure you can also find it on a European website somewhere. As of next year, international SEPA transfer should go through in 1 day max, same as local.
full member
Activity: 373
Merit: 100
August 21, 2011, 07:26:58 AM
Local SEPA transfer should go through in 1 day maximum
That's really nice to know - do you have somewhere I can look this up?
newbie
Activity: 49
Merit: 0
August 21, 2011, 05:22:09 AM
These are indeed SEPA regulations, the maximum time permitted for a transfer to go through. Local SEPA transfer should go through in 1 day maximum, international SEPA transfers maximum 3 days, but naturally they can go through sooner, depending indeed on the banks involved in the transfer.
Pages:
Jump to: