Buying from Panamoz

[Hillbilly]

Guys/gals, please let me clarify this payment processor concern [...]

Thanks very much for that - it's an interesting insight. If it wouldn't be too much trouble, would you mind explaining a few points that might help me (and probably others) understand further how these things work?

• How does PayPal's system operate?
• Does it always operate that way (I think you or someone indicated earlier that some PayPal transactions are covered by the CCA)?
• Do any other providers sometimes operate in a way similar to PayPal (I'm wondering whether that might explain the previously mentioned Trading Standards bod saying that a SagePay transaction wasn't covered)?
• If PayPal and/or others operate different transation types, how can the consumer know when the CCA applies and when it doesn't?

Thanks.

 

[ecoleman]

Thanks very much for that - it's an interesting insight. If it wouldn't be too much trouble, would you mind explaining a few points that might help me (and probably others) understand further how these things work?


[*]How does PayPal's system operate?

PayPal is not a bank, merchant account or payment service provider in terms of a standard PayPal account.
PayPal does offer a service called Paypal pro where a merchant can use them as a PSP. This is where a customer is presented with a payment screen similar to most others, but the payment is handled by PayPal and the funds are put into he merchants PayPal account. When using this service you are covered under section 75 as normal.

[*]Does it always operate that way (I think you or someone indicated earlier that some PayPal transactions are covered by the CCA)?

I stand to be corrected here, but I believe if you select PayPal as your payment option but then choose to fund the entire transaction from your credit card, then you are covered. If you find your account with a credit card as a separate transaction and then pay with your PayPal balance then you will not be covered under section 75. You would have to rely on PayPal buyer protection.

[*]Do any other providers sometimes operate in a way similar to PayPal (I'm wondering whether that might explain the previously mentioned Trading Standards bod saying that a SagePay transaction wasn't covered)?

I would imagine he same sort of rules as above would apply with google wallet, amazon payment system and nochex. Nochex is a bit similar to PayPal that you can pay directly with credit card or with a nochex account balance. The direct payment, you will be covered but not with account balance.

[*]If PayPal and/or others operate different transation types, how can the consumer know when the CCA applies and when it doesn't?

You will know you are using something like PayPal etc as you will have to login to your account.
As a rule of thumb, if you are simply presented with a screen to enter your credit card information, then you will be covered.

 

[Hillbilly]

I placed my first order with them late on Monday, and it's currently with DHL in Hong Kong. Will report back.

OK, for the record, an update as promised.

• I requested details for placing an order with a BACS payment on Monday afternoon. By the time the details came through and I made the payment it was after office hours UK time (around 6pm I think - Hong Kong time is apparently about 7hrs later).
• I received an eMail first thing Tuesday morning acknowledging the BACS payment, and another one around 2pm saying it had been dispatched and providing a DHL tracking number. This would be around 9pm Kong Kong time, so I wasn't surprised to discover that the status only changed to "picked up" the following day (around 5pm Wednesday HK time).
• It apparently left Kong Kong in the early hours of Thursday morning and arrived in Germany (presumably DHL's hub) around 6pm.
• It left Germany in the early hours of Friday morning and arrived at my door in the UK around 12 hours later (about 3pm).

(Times are local except where otherwise stated)

So, not as incredibly fast as the single day that someone reported over on AVForum recently (via UPS), but I guess some of that depends on the fortunes of timing. Placing an order on Monday evening and receiving the delivery on Friday afternoon is not a bad turnaround in my experience. Considering circumstances and time differences were such that it didn't start its journey until Wednesday and it came all the way from Hong Kong, I think it's pretty damned good.

Original English language manual and proper UK 3-pin lead for the charger, as stated on the web site, and a card with a reference number for the supplier's own 1-year replacement warranty (I opted to pay a few quid extra to upgrade to a full replacement warranty). I haven't had a chance to try it out yet, but I have no reason to think it will be faulty.

Hopefully I won't get to test the warranty but I haven't yet seen anything that suggests to me that it would all go pear-shaped in the event I had to claim. Unless I do have such problems in the future, I'm a happy customer.

 

[Hillbilly]

Thanks very much for that - especially:

You will know you are using something like PayPal etc as you will have to login to your account.
As a rule of thumb, if you are simply presented with a screen to enter your credit card information, then you will be covered.

That makes perfect sense to me.

 

[siblingchris]

Despite all the S75 talk using BACs for stuff like this troubles me
It is effectively handing cash direct to the merchant and in the case of any dispute there is no one to help you with it at all. Even if a trusted merchant it does not guarantee ther evil be no problems or dispute.

Anyhow, back tompanamoz it does seem from all the feedback, regardless of payment method they are a very good place to do business with and I think my new DSLR will be from them unless I can find a better deal elsewhere

Btw Panamax FAQ states how they use PayPal etc.

 

[Hillbilly]

Despite all the S75 talk using BACs for stuff like this troubles me

When using BACS you don't have S75 protection at all (unless you pay part directly on your credit card, as the OP points out). As Panamoz use PayPal, I concluded (rightly or wrongly) that S75 wouldn't apply anyway, so I elected to pay via BACS and get the 5% discount. I probably wouldn't have risked it if it weren't for the fact that there were lots of positive reports about them in here and elsewhere.

It is effectively handing cash direct to the merchant

Not really; it's more like sending them a cheque. In the event of a problem you would at least have evidence that they received your money. It may not be much good if they had gone bust or "done a runner", but it's no different from having made a cheque payment AFAICT. That was a normal way to pay for substantial or distant purchases before credit cards were widely available.