Technology news and Jobs 
Fuzzy Logic eBay members ask Australia Post: are Money Orders safe?
Fuzzy Logic eBay members ask Australia Post: are Money Orders safe? | eBay members ask Australia Post: are Money Orders safe? |
|
| by Alex Zaharov-Reutt | |
| Wednesday, 16 July 2008 | |
|
Page 2 of 4 The letter from the eBay rebels to Australia Post continues:Featured Whitepaper
5 Best Practices for Smartphone Support
“I have always believed, as I am sure my customers believed, that it is an extremely safe way to transact as the person presenting a Money Order issued for more than $20 must identify himself to Australia Post staff by producing a current driver's licence, pension card, credit card or similar document in the payee's name and bearing the payee's signature or photograph. “Furthermore, I understand that when a Money Order has been crossed with two traverse parallel lines payment of the order shall not be made unless the order is presented for payment through a bank of Australia. “Finally, where a Money Order has been lost or destroyed, a replacement order can be issued by producing the counterfoil issued with the order or giving details of the serial number of the order or of the amount, date, office of issue and, where available, any payee's name inserted in the order at the time of issue or loss.. “eBay however, has been arguing that PayPal is the 'safest' transaction product, implying that all other transactors are unsafe by comparison, and they continue to do so. “This concerns me as a long standing customer of Australia Post, as it gives the impression that established transactors such as Australia Post, do not offer equal security measures for it's customers. “In a recent decision by the ACCC (see Ref.1 Clause 5.1.7.3) it did not support eBay's view, noting that: "The evidence available does not support the view that PayPal is the most secure method of payment or offers the best service for all transactions." Continued on page 3 |
| < Next story in category | Previous story in the category > |
|---|
