Ebay requiring photo identification

1

I sold a product on ebay, the buyer paid, but ebay doesn’t forward the money to me. Is that blackmail , or illegal or just nasty? Details below:

We recently asked you to review and update some details on your eBay account. Looks like you haven’t made any updates yet. Your payouts will be on hold until you fix this. Please do this by 2024-09-11 to get your account back in good standing. Go to eBayFollow the instructions in the alert at the top of the pageOnce you’ve made the requested updates, we’ll review and then follow up with you.

Every now and then I get further warnings:

Your payouts are on hold until you update your account details. Please update by 11 Sep, 2024 to avoid further restriction

Upload photo ID
Help us verify your identity by uploading one of the following valid, non-expired documents:
As shown above,they ask me to supply a photo ID. They didn’t ask me before I sold and send the goods. They didn’t ask fro a Photo ID before they get the money from the buyer. But now they blackmail me, holding the money back until I supply a photo ID. I wondering what a photo ID should help. The receipient got his goods and paid. That means the deal is accepted from all the involved parties, exept e Bay. But, if they have brain and use it, they must accept that I own the money and I am the rightful recipient of the money, since I am obviously the seller. The bankaccount I supplied before the deal was done. My question is now, why do they need a photo ID at this stage? I get the impression ebay seems to be the same spyware as Google. Collecting data for whom? Both Google and ebay are American companies. I’m getting worried about supplying any data to US companies.
Besides all that, I am wondering why they need a photo ID since they never see me in person. But ebay can’t be contacted. You get only answers from a computer, at best. But the deal was accepted, only now, as they should send me the money, they don’t accept it anymore with a detail which has nothing to do with the deal itself.

1 Like
Photo ID and Identity Verification
2

The requirement to provide photographic identification will most likely be to meet Australian Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Laws. First thing to confirm is it is a genuine eBay request.

Many financial institutions have been requiring their account holders to verify their identity to meet current requirements. Such requests have been subject of threads within the community.

So that eBay does fall foul of these laws, it can legally suspend transactions until such time the information has been provided.

If one has recently done the above verification, subsequent verification could result if there has been a substantial change in account details, such as changing banking details. This is to ensure details remain updated to meet the law and verify the account holder.

There is little you can do but provide such information, if you wish to continue a relationship with eBay.

I have also updated the title in the thread to better summarise the issue.

2 Likes
3

Probably none of the above. The reasons for the verification relate to eBay complying with various laws and also to protect users from fraudulent transactions.

The right to withhold funds pending ID verification is included in the eBay terms of use. You would have agreed to those terms prior to listing the item for sale.

3 Likes
4

Absolutely eBay can be contacted and give excellent service. Generally you won’t hold on their Chat line for more than five minutes. Always found their staff to be well informed and on top of what they need to know.
eBay in many cases guarantee refunds and what eBay are doing is quite within their right to ask for photo ID. I would not be bothered at all being an American company. I would be more worried if an Australian company with their poor/low IT operations. eBay/PayPal/Google are known to have some of the best security available.

1 Like
5

Sad, I don’t have very good experience with American companies. But can proof, Googel is spyware. And to me, photo ID doesn’t make sense, since they don’t see me anyway. I can do the same trick as underaged do, if they buy alcohol or cigarettes. Use ID from my older brother or friend.

1 Like
6

A photo ID is worth more ‘points’ when it comes to the requirements imposed on businesses for the purpose of customer verification. A thing known as Know Your Customer, or KYC. Imposed by Gov laws.

Businesses can be audited, and indeed taken to court if they don’t follow the rules.

7

I am mainly angry, since I sold a battery with ebay. after they got the money, they ask me to proof my identification by copie of passport and …and. That is now more then a year ago since the customer paid for my battery, but I never got the money. Why didn’t they ask for identification before they accepted my advertising?

8

Sounds like an outright scam.

You are without the battery.
You never got the money.
They also scammed you out of your photo ID details (which they can then use in more scams and other crimes).

?

As an example of how dodgy this all is … when the social media age ban was introduced, the legislation was amended at the last minute to prohibit social media companies from requiring government id.

I think the logic (from a very small number of non-comatose MPs) was that allowing social media companies to collect government id was a recipe for further data breach disasters.

Unfortunately the wording was never quite “right”. All it forces social media companies to do is offer an alternative to government id. So a social media company can offer a completely unrealistic or unpalatable alternative to government id … and so effectively require government id. Or customers could in theory freely choose to present government id for whatever reasons.

I would expect therefore that the social media age ban is opening up some delicious new opportunities for scammers and other criminals.

There is a difference though between “ebay” collecting government id and “social media company” collecting government id. The latter is collecting government id precisely from the people where the social media company doesn’t actually need or want any id e.g. persons over 16 who have a drivers licence and therefore are not excluded. In other words, the only people submitting government id can be ignored.

That said, it is always possible with these government intrusions that there is “mission creep” i.e. once government id is collected for one purpose (minimum age check) it can be used for other purposes later on.

1 Like
9

It’s over a year later, the money won’t be paid until the ID is provided. Looks like the ID was never provided?

2 Likes
10

Hard to say for sure based on the information provided. Either way though the demand for photo ID details could be a scam - and should always by default be treated as such until a compelling case emerges that the demand for details is “legitimate”.

1 Like
11

Yes, it’s not explicitly stated but there’s the inference from the OP saying that they frequently receive reminders about supplying the requested information before the payment can be released?
What would be stopping the payment to be forwarded otherwise?
It’ll probably remain a mystery to us :thinking:

3 Likes
12

Ebay clearly state:

To sell on eBay and receive payouts, we’ll need to confirm your identity.

If one refuses to provide photo identification to Ebay in accordance with Australian legislative requirements, Ebay will not process payouts for any sales made through its platform.

1 Like
13

Scammers know that too though. So if you receive a demand to confirm your identity, it should be treated with a very high degree of suspicion.

Assuming that the demand is legitimate and taking up the OP’s issue … when did that change? There could have been some transitional arrangements that noone bothered to deal with in the “legislation”. Still, the government doesn’t care and there’s probably nothing that can be done about it now.

Blackmail? Yes
Nasty? Yes
Illegal? Probably not although the linked ebay page makes no claim about why they are imposing this requirement and whether there is a legal basis for it.

1 Like
14

eBay send their messages to the member’s message inbox as well to the email account of the member. If a member is ever unsure about an email, they should check their eBay message box in their account.

Members have to accept the terms of service before they can use their account. If policy does change members are notified by email and need to accept the changes. Whether a member reads the changes and accepts or just accepts is up to the member.

None of that makes the request blackmail, nasty, or illegal. A member does not have to use eBay if they cannot accept the contract between them and eBay.

2 Likes
15

It is outlined in the T&Cs.

The message send by eBay will also outline its legal obligations and why the photo identification is required. From memory the one we received a while back did.

2 Likes
16

To save a user scrolling through the lengthy TOS I have copied the relevant section about what identity requirements may need to be met before payments are passed to the seller.

  • Provide us with all information which we may require for purposes that include: verifying your identity, complying with applicable laws and regulations such as anti-money laundering and sanctions screening obligations, allowing us to manage settlements of your transaction proceeds, and assessing fraud and risk. If you are an individual, this information may include, without limitation, your full name, address, phone number, date of birth, taxpayer identification number, bank account information, and a form of government-issued identification (e.g., a copy of your identity card or driver’s license). If you are a business, this information may include, without limitation, your full business name, address, phone number, entity type, bank account information, tax identification number, and business number, in addition to details regarding your beneficial owner(s), director(s), officer(s), authorized representative, legal representative, and/or primary contact, such as name, contact information, nationality, title, and government-issued identification (such as a United States Social Security Number). You understand that we will be unable to settle your proceeds or issue you any tax documents (such as a United States Internal Revenue Service Form 1099-K) if you do not provide or appropriately update us with accurate contact information and other requested data.
1 Like
17

I completely agree for a new account being created. You accept their rules or you don’t use the service.

That is a greyer area.

For example, if a seller started a listing before the change, the change then mandatorily happened, the auction completed with the purchaser owing the money to the seller, but the money is then withheld from payment by the site operator. Or any similar sequence of events.

In that scenario, even if you thought it absolutely unacceptable to have to provide government id in order to use the site and would never have signed up if you had known in advance … the only way of liberating the outstanding money would seem to be to hand over the government id, get the outstanding money, then leave the site permanently, allowing them to keep a copy of your government id at risk forever.

So that’s why I am calling it blackmail and nasty.

This could have been handled via transitional provisions e.g. any listing that is started before the change will complete under the old rules (governments include such provisions in legislation frequently) - but I imagine that noone cared enough to do that.

I specifically wrote that it is probably not illegal.

Only in “outline” though. That I could see, it does not spell out the legal basis or elaborate on the specific legal requirements.

You may be correct that at a certain point in the process you get a more explicit email - but that looks a lot like bait and switch. They should be 100% upfront about what you are actually going to be required to do in order to sign up and why. I think that part of the problem is that the page that you linked to is a bit too general and a bit too legalese e.g. may include, without limitation, ....

Aside: 42 pages of dense legalese that you are “agreeing” to? Yes, this is a well-known problem and by no means limited to ebay. What would happen if ebay were forced to limit the Ts and Cs to a single A4 page written in plain English? :rofl:

Which cycles back to the top of this post. You accept their rules when you sign up - but you can only do that if they are upfront about what those rules are.

18

Government legislation changes over time. Any changes which occur overrides anything which have been agreed to by a consumer in the past in terms and conditions.

Businesses are required to meet legislative requirements. This includes ensuring all of its activities comply with the legislation. eBay falls under Australia’s anti-money laundering legislation and as such is required to ensure it meets this legislation. This includes receiving sufficient verification information for its account holders. If it allows transactions to occur without sufficient verification, they fall foul of the legislative requirements. This exposes them to penalties and enforcement action by the relevant government agencies which administer the legislation.

It isn’t. eBay is meeting its statutory obligations.

Being in Australia, it is impossible to avoid such obligations.

2 Likes
19

Legal issues aside, if I entered a contract, written or implied, under a set of T&C and between completing the contract and being paid something changed that I was not willing to accept, I think I would reasonably be livid and consider it nasty as well as essentially blackmail - regardless of responsibility/fault/legality. Dismissing that feeling as being unfounded? People’s feelings are personal.

Since Australia is a country where retroactive and retrospective laws are allowed the powers making the laws should have been clever enough to have better drafted the ones in play here to exclude in-progress sales as was described.

A reality is it is increasingly common that if one is not willing to fully give up whatever ‘they’ want one is disadvantaged/marginalised and there seems no recourse.

2 Likes
20

That might be true - although noone has provided a link to substantiate that.

However it is quite beside the point because something can be “meeting its legal obligations” and “blackmail and nasty”. In other words, it is a false dichotomy.

Please note that these were the OP’s choice of words - but obviously I agreed with them.

I totally agree with you. You may have misinterpreted what I wrote - and I think I can see why.

My point was: Even today, right now, a new customer … there is inadequate disclosure upfront what those rules are. There’s 42 pages of waffle, specifically not documenting a legal basis, let alone telling the customer how long they retain government id information for and what steps they take to protect that information while it is retained - so that they aren’t the next Data Breach Disaster.

Yes, we all understand that a company can change the rules after a customer signs up, sometimes after many years, and those changes may well be detrimental to the customer, and those changes may or may not be made under legal compulsion.