HOPING to simplify his eBay comic book auctions, Jeff Resnick turned to PayPal, eBay's online payment service, to automate and speed up payment transactions.
But when an eBay fraud artist hijacked his identity in early 2002 to sell nonexistent computers, PayPal froze his account, and Mr. Resnick, who lived in Hoboken at the time, set out on a long and frustrating course to undo the damage, prove his innocence and reclaim his money.
If you had a similar experience, you may finally be in luck. Because of lawsuits by Mr. Resnick and others who contend that PayPal has not been helpful enough in resolving account disputes or investigating faulty transfers, the company has agreed to a $9.25 million settlement that applies to most account holders from Oct. 1, 1999, to Jan. 31, 2004.
After legal fees and other expenses, PayPal will pay the remainder, over $5 million, to account holders. Customers who can show a loss from unauthorized activity, restricted account access or problems notifying PayPal of account errors will draw from an estimated pool of $4.3 million. A short form will compensate claims of up to $50; those claiming higher losses must complete a longer form, subject to a review by a court-appointed administrator.
Even those who did not notice account problems may file for statutory damages. The settlement allots $1 million for distribution to this pool, for which those making claims need only establish that they held an account during the period.
Claims may be filed at www.settlement4onlinepayments.com.
With so many eligible customers, the amount meted out to individuals could be smaller than settlement estimates. In 2003, PayPal's annual report listed 40 million members with more than $12 billion in transactions. A PayPal spokeswoman, Amanda Piers, said, ''It's safe to say we've sent out several million notices.''
PayPal agreed to the arrangement in June after more than two years of litigation in Federal District Court in San Jose, Calif., where the company is based. The settlement must still be approved by the court, which has scheduled a hearing for Sept. 24.
The plaintiffs' lawyers said that PayPal's practices violated the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, which establishes procedures by which financial institutions must investigate unauthorized fund transfers and communicate with account owners during disputes.
In making the settlement, PayPal admitted no wrongdoing, contending instead that the transfer act, which was passed in 1978 as banks were introducing automated-teller cards, had been interpreted too broadly.
Since June 2003, PayPal said, it has returned over $5.1 million in frozen assets to its customers, at least part of that sum as a result of the litigation.
In addition to the settlement, PayPal has modified some practices. Among other things, it will provide a written explanation to anyone whose account has been frozen for more than 45 days, and provide a provisional credit if the initial investigation is not completed within 10 days.
''Whenever people have control of your money, it seems fair and reasonable that you be notified what's happening,'' said a lawyer for the plaintiffs, A.J. De Bartolomeo. ''It prevents the David-and-Goliath syndrome.''
