Topic: TradeHill - Why we no longer accept Dwolla and an open letter to Ben Milne - page 11. (Read 37522 times)

I can see the benefit of making the community aware that Dwolla transactions are reversable.  I still don't think Tradehill acted professionally and definitely hurt their chances of prevailing when this goes to court or arbitration.

That's what they did. They also explained why they removed Dwolla as a payment option and alerted the community to a serious fraud risk. Big exchanges are not the only things that take Dwolla.

Public statement about chargebacks (Bruce having that Dwolla guy at the phone):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88zTVzT2vL0&start=1745
That Dwolla guy at first denied that they have chargebacks, and later acknowledging they have and apologized for lying to Bruce.
So basically Dwolla was afraid telling TH that they do chargeback, exactly the same like PayPal, Visa, etc.

I haven't seen any statement by Dwolla that they are now allowing chargebacks so my assumption is that they haven't identified why transactions are going from credited back to pending. 

They did respond, they stated they were investigating and would get back to Tradehill with clarification.

The right move for Tradehill would have been to remove Dwolla as a payment option for the time being and wait to hear back from them one way or another. 

Apparently Dwolla changed one of their single most important selling point: charge-backs. Dwolla altered confirmed transactions behind the back of TH. Dwolla did not respond to communication for 2 weeks. I don't know in what world you live, 2 weeks with increasing frauds is a very long time in the business world. Especially if the other party goes silent. You defending Dwolla inexcusable behavior, one is forced to assume that you are a Dwolla shareholder.


Well, I agree with that.

Did you ever have your legal counsel contact them?  It's an obvious step that you seemed to have skipped.

All I am trying to point out is that you lose a lot of leverage by going public like you did.  Assume that Dwolla acted within their rights by reversing the transactions.  The ONLY reason they would offer to settle with you is to keep you quiet.  Now that you blew the story out of the water there is no reason for them to offer to deal with you and they are much more likely to just say "sue us".

Two-weeks is not a long time in the business world.  It is very likely they haven't decided what they were going to do, hell they might not even be sure what is happening yet.  I am sure that they want to plug the leak before they set any precedent on how they are going to deal with transactions that went from credited back to pending.  I would bet that the move back to pending was something that was automated in their system and they are probably trying to work with their banks to find out how and why it is happening.

They did tell you they would get back to you with clarification.  You email and call dozens of times combined.  That is amatuerish whether you realize it or not.

Another error you made is your putting someones name out there and calling him a "known scammer".  Doing that is not a responsible action for you or your company unless you are 100% sure of the fact and have proof.  Is it probably true?  It looks like it.  Still if there is any possibility that it wasn't a scam you are opening yourself to additional liability.

nevemind lol

Hi CryptoCommodity,

This was our option of last resort.

We have emails going back everyday for about a week wherein we explicitly outlined the issue and asked for it to be handled. We called multiple times per day. We sent them transaction IDs over two weeks ago asking for data/explanation. They replied saying our on line statements were accurate ; we gave them data showing the statements were changing retroactively.

We were not going to continue taking loses. If we stopped using Dwolla, our customers would have been very suspicious.

Our credentials are public and can be found here : http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=19537.0

Adam

+1

Hey Dwolla, since you are obviously reading this, FUCK YOU!
I will no longer use your services. I trust Tradehill on this one. You are silent and you lose the debate completely.
You have been fronting a service you cannot provide and tried to make it look like you could. Now you are on the road to being a new paypal, only to be dumped like the operation paypal opt-out which is going on now. Your a bunch of losers trying to pass your faults and losses onto others. This will spend the end of you I hope. We need real people to help bitcoin and the people, not another group of con artists. Goodbye Dwolla, it's been fun.

I very much appreciate Tradehill being open about this. I recently opened a Dwolla account and if they are now changing their terms to allow chargebacks on previous transactions then I for one would not continue to deal thru them.

I applaud Tradehill here and cannot understand what this CryptoCommodity poster is on about. He sounds like an idiot trying to cover up Dwolla bad behavior. The fact that Tradehill as a large customer has not been unable to get a response even acknowledging the problem from higher mgmt at Dwolla speaks volumes. It certainly looks like Tradehill only went public after having considerable problem getting adequate response from Dwolla.

As a new Dwolla customer I can only say I'd rather deal with Tradehill then Dwolla.

So how are we going to transfer in without Dwolla in future?

from their website:

What is Dwolla's Phone Number?
Last Updated: Jun 29, 2011 08:24AM CDT
From 9AM to 6PM Monday - Friday Dwolla's customer service is available at 515.280.1000.


I suggest we make some phone calls.

also the only reasons exchanges started using dwolla was that it apparently didnt do chargebacks, as it seems and if this is the case and its system can be frauded its only a matter of time that other exchanges get hit or remove it as an option...

this +1

Sounds about right to me. If one wants to argue that TradeHill isn't acting in their own best interest, then oh well... they have to be the ultimate decider of that. If the argument is simply that that isn't how business is done, then maybe that needs to change.

I was just doing the same thing .... same source linked as above ...the irony of  these quotes:

Especially with fraud, exchanges have problems. Virtual or not.

1. In our highly regulated economy, moving money legally and operating anonymously don’t go hand in hand. Converting anything to real cash means at some point you have to prove who you are. It’s part of modern regulation and is there for good reasons. Naturally, it also becomes a point for potential fraud. Eventually, the numbers hit someone’s balance sheet and they will be reported, taxed, or penalized.

2. Any platform will be abused to the fullest extent possible, if not well controlled.

This is prevalent in Paypal’s history and a chapter in any payment network’s history.
Everyone at one point has had a fraud problem and has been targeted by the mafia, drug runners, and an assortment of people who traditionally no one wants to do business with.
3. If allowed, fraud will run free and someone will be held responsible for it


What everyone probably doesn’t want me to say.

Have we found suspicious and fraudulent activity? Yes.

Do we deal with it accordingly? Yes.

There will always be endless amounts of attempted fraud. If it goes unchecked and ignored, the hellishly brutal onslaught of soul (and time) devouring problems that will stem from it will forever alienate any platform and its users.

The way Dwolla looks at it

If you are:

A legitimate US user
Accessing your own money
Engaging in a legal transaction
Then you should probably be able to use Dwolla how you’d like. If your intention is to buy a truckload of bananas and let them rot in the sun for a week so you can make a killing on banana bread, we won’t interfere. Doesn’t seem like a sound idea, but we won’t stop you.

We care about people legally accessing their own money and engaging in a legal transaction. If they are doing that then it’s not really our right to wag our finger and say, "that’s not ok."

a little off-topic, just found couple of interesting articles re Dwolla and Bitcoin from a month ago


"Now that our name popped up in a Fortune article referencing Bitcoins, the time to be silent is probably over."
- Ben Milne, Dwolla founder
http://www.siliconprairienews.com/2011/06/bitcoin-what-is-it-and-how-is-dwolla-involved-in-its-marketplace


In the following guest post submitted Monday, Dwolla founder and CEO Ben Milne directly responds to questions that have arisen and expresses both Dwolla's take and his personal opinion on Bitcoin.
http://www.siliconprairienews.com/2011/06/guest-post-the-virtual-currency-debate-exchange-and-hysteria

I think they are definitely reading this thread.  This is a little chunk of their business right here.

How did they know to delete the comment ? it was pulled down within a minute of me posting the screenshot? I highly doubt they would pull it off an hour later all of sudden?

WOW, you are right!  that means someone from Dwolla is reading this thread  HELLO THERE ?  why don't you guys answer some questions on this thread ? what are you afraid of ?