Acceptable use policies at companies such as PayPal are something I understand and back. Even so, what happened to me seems ridiculous, and I imagine others have gone through it.
A third party listed a donation link pointing at my PayPal account on his own questionable website, inviting visitors to chip in toward the cost of running his service on my servers. I stress that it was ANOTHER person who put that link, for my account, on ANOTHER person's server.
I know him, and learning of it made me furious. Posting my PayPal details anywhere was never allowed by me, least of all on a site featuring adult material. But that is not the issue.
What I want to know is how what another person did, on a site I do not own, can put me in violation of an acceptable use policy.
PayPal pointed me to an appeal via the Resolution Center. Once I was in the online center, I found no option for submitting an appeal, so I had to find the appeals email address with a web search.
I tried repeatedly to appeal and was rejected every time. The reply was either that this case could not be appealed, or that the case had been reviewed and the closing of my account confirmed.
Opening a new ID with the same linked bank account was not allowed either.
An email from them urged me to sign in and take out my money. After I signed in, the account was restricted and nothing was possible. Repeated notices said they could hold my money for 180 days, which I accepted. Yet once 180 days were over, I still had no access, and certainly could not request a withdrawal.
Because of its convenience and good interest rate, my balance once exceeded $10,000. Luckily it was not that high when they froze it.
The money has finally reached me, though that is not what matters. For 2 years they held my funds hostage over another person's deed. Does that mean any dislike of mine could be acted on by setting up an adult website with a donate link to the target's account? Does anyone else see the problem?
Should others have suffered the same, there may well be a good class action lawsuit.
0 comments