Enhancing Dispute Resolution: A Seller Deposit System

[GringoMonkey]

We've all seen disputes where sellers claim they can't pay refunds after a ruling goes against them. This is unacceptable and erodes confidence in our platform.

My suggestion is to require sellers to deposit an amount equal to their most expensive service's cost. This deposit would be held by BHW and used for refunds if a dispute favors the buyer.

This system would:

• Ensure refunds for buyers.
• Deter opportunists and make it harder for illegitimate sellers to operate.
• Increase trust across the platform.

What do you think?

 

[Lukmat]

What do you think?

Yes, if BHW would be made by some kiddos, but it's serious business regulated by law.
They cannot store money. That's the main reason why there is no escrow on BHW, because it's very complicated by law.

 

[indianmojojojo]

It's a good suggestion. But if am not wrong once they start to hold money/deposits/escrow

(FCA) may require:

1. Electronic Money Institution (EMI) license or
2. Small Payment Institution (SPI) license (depending on how funds are handled)

Then separate customer funds from company funds.

Comply with anti-money laundering (AML) and KYC rules. There is a lot of accountability.

Finally bring crypto into the equation and boom opens a can of unknown future regulations.

As a lot of buyers(not sellers) prefer paying only in crypto in some cases.

To do all this BHW will have add a mark up, hire specialists in this field, etc. additionally get a legal team

It would cost them a lot and the fee to facilitate this will be on the product. Fee from both the buyer and seller.

I would be happy if there is an escrow as that would weed out the churn and burn scammers who keep running scams especially in the area of selling AWS credits, management of blackhat ads account for casino and reputation management.

But I think it's lot more complicated as some services are in the grey area.

--

Option 2 is for BHW to tie up with a 3rd party who is already an escrow. They could let them collect a fee from both the buyer and seller. I think it would reduce their legal liability.

 

[GringoMonkey]

Yes, if BHW would be made by some kiddos, but it's serious business regulated by law.
They cannot store money. That's the main reason why there is no escrow on BHW, because it's very complicated by law.

It's a good suggestion. But if am not wrong once they start to hold money/deposits/escrow

(FCA) may require:

1. Electronic Money Institution (EMI) license or
2. Small Payment Institution (SPI) license (depending on how funds are handled)

Then separate customer funds from company funds.

Comply with anti-money laundering (AML) and KYC rules. There is a lot of accountability.

Finally bring crypto into the equation and boom opens a can of unknown future regulations.

As a lot of buyers(not sellers) prefer paying only in crypto in some cases.

To do all this BHW will have add a mark up, hire specialists in this field, etc. additionally get a legal team

It would cost them a lot and the fee to facilitate this will be on the product. Fee from both the buyer and seller.

I would be happy if there is an escrow as that would weed out the churn and burn scammers who keep running scams especially in the area of selling AWS credits, management of blackhat ads account for casino and reputation management.

But I think it's lot more complicated as some services are in the grey area.

--

Option 2 is for BHW to tie up with a 3rd party who is already an escrow. They could let them collect a fee from both the buyer and seller. I think it would reduce their legal liability.

You are over complicating matters.

It does not need escrow or anything like that.

The new bst thread cost would simply be $30 + cost of most expensive service.

 

[indianmojojojo]

You are over complicating matters.

It does not need escrow or anything like that.

The new bst thread cost would simply be $30 + cost of most expensive service.

Ah that. Yes should be effective. Or atleast a minimum of 500-1000 USD deposit or the most expensive service whichever is higher.

 

[Lukmat]

The new bst thread cost would simply be $30 + cost of most expensive service.

This is str8 way to finaly kill the marketplace. Who will pay $30 + cost of most expensive service if sales are low already?

 

[HenryObi]

We've all seen disputes where sellers claim they can't pay refunds after a ruling goes against them. This is unacceptable and erodes confidence in our platform.

My suggestion is to require sellers to deposit an amount equal to their most expensive service's cost. This deposit would be held by BHW and used for refunds if a dispute favors the buyer.

This system would:

• Ensure refunds for buyers.
• Deter opportunists and make it harder for illegitimate sellers to operate.
• Increase trust across the platform.

What do you think?

This makes sense but I think this would only be applicable to sellers with BSTs. Some users still render services through WTH and HAF.

Overall, this is a good idea.

 

[indianmojojojo]

This makes sense but I think this would only be applicable to sellers with BSTs. Some users still render services through WTH and HAF.

Overall, this is a good idea.

I think imo scams mostly happen with non-marketplace sellers as opposed to with the ones with BST. A lot of times ones with BST are more invested in their personal brand and reputation. Not saying this is always true but a lot of times atleast imo.

But with the new rule of not being able to link IMs, websites or emails directly on the HAF/WTB post has also reduced the scams to an extent is what I feel.

So there should be some kind of a filter or a check for some sellers without a BST mindlessly replying on every wtb and haf post. Some do automated replies on almost every kind of service possible.

But the downside to this is, there are some upcoming talent who are serious and starting their career who will genuinely get affected if there are monetory checkpoints.

This is str8 way to finaly kill the marketplace. Who will pay $30 + cost of most expensive service if sales are low already?

But there is a possibility of the sales now going to geniune and serious sellers imo.

I understand there is always a downside to implementing that.

Will have to see which is better. Is reducing the number of scams and have only HQ quality transactions or loose a % of sellers.

 

[RichMedusa]

It's indeed a good idea in theory, but in practice there are legal concerns and mods are probably more interested in applying several new features on Marketplace 2.0 than applying individual changes at this moment

 

[GringoMonkey]

This is str8 way to finaly kill the marketplace. Who will pay $30 + cost of most expensive service if sales are low already?

Anybody who cannot afford to subsidise 1 copy of their own service is an inherent risk to the marketplace. Better to have less of them and less disputes.

If you don't have the cash to start big, start small.

 

[INCC]

Anybody who cannot afford to subsidise 1 copy of their own service is an inherent risk to the marketplace. Better to have less of them and less disputes.

If you don't have the cash to start big, start small.

100% agreed.

At the end of the day, the Marketplace is a business and not a charity.

Selling high-ticket items that they cannot cover shouldn't be a concern for the rest of the community. Don't sell if you can't take the responsibilities.

 

[HenryObi]

Anybody who cannot afford to subsidise 1 copy of their own service is an inherent risk to the marketplace. Better to have less of them and less disputes.

If you don't have the cash to start big, start small.

This is very similar to my reply on a different topic. The topic was about those faking reviews when they could just offer their services for free to a select few to get review. Anyone who doesn't have a small capital to support their business at the beginning stages, should start with a service that costs significantly less to deliver.

 

[PetraAnn]

While we don't think it's a bad idea, taking deposits just isn't feasible. Especially since there's a lot of ways business is being done on this forum at the moment. HOWEVER, marketplace2 will help alleviate this issue.

I've been pushing the project manager to give the Community Team some notes that we can put into the upcoming BHW News section (this is what I've been ultimately waiting for). Once I get those notes, we'll be able to start telling you a little more about it than just "MP2 is coming".

And, as always, keep the feedback and ideas coming. Even if we can't do something with them right now, it could always be something we loop back to in the future.

---

If you have further questions please visit our newbie guide summary here: https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/s...ter-list-of-all-newbie-guide-threads.1389081/

If that doesn’t answer your question, please reach out to our Support for further guidance.

Answer Supplied - Thread Closed​