Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service

I am filing a formal complaint against PayPal , Inc. for multiple violations of federal, XXXX, and XXXX  state laws and regulations. PayPal has refused my repeated requests to speak with a supervisor, denied my legitimate request for a refund despite violations by the seller of federal and state laws, and continued to facilitate the sellers illegal activities, which are in direct violation of PayPal 's own Acceptable Use Policy.

1. Refusal to Escalate to a Supervisor PayPal has denied multiple requests for escalation to a supervisor, blocking access to higher-level support and preventing resolution of significant issues. This refusal violates consumer rights under both federal and state consumer protection laws. 

Federal Violations : FTC Act, Section 5 ( 15 U.S.C. 45 ) prohibits " unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce. '' By refusing legitimate requests for escalation, PayPal denies fair dispute resolution, which may be considered an unfair practice under the FTC Act.

XXXX  Violations : XXXX  Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ( FDUTPA ), 501.204, XXXX. Stat. : FDUTPA prohibits unfair practices in trade and commerce. By blocking access to supervisors and not allowing issues to be escalated, PayPal engages in practices that can be seen as restrictive and unfair under FDUTPA. 

XXXX Violations : XXXX  Unfair Competition Law ( UCL ), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200 prohibits unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business practices. Denying access to supervisors when addressing serious disputes and potential fraud is an unfair practice and violates UCL.

2. Refusal to Refund Despite Seller Violations Despite substantial evidence showing that the seller violated PayPals Acceptable Use Policy by engaging in illegal activities across multiple states, PayPal has refused to issue a refund.

Federal Violations : Truth in Billing Act : PayPal has a responsibility to provide clarity in billing and refund procedures. Refusal to refund despite documented violations by the seller may violate consumer protection principles under federal law.

XXXX  Violations : FDUTPA, 501.204, Fla. Stat. : PayPals refusal to refund despite the sellers policy violations constitutes an unfair and deceptive practice under XXXX  law, causing financial and emotional distress.

XXXX  Violations : XXXX  Consumer Legal Remedies Act ( CLRA ), Cal. Civ. Code 1770 ( a ) : Prohibits businesses from falsely representing the status or rights of transactions. PayPals refusal to honor its Acceptable Use Policy in this case contradicts this statute and misrepresents their commitment to refund consumers when policies are breached.

3. Acceptable Use Policy Violation Enforcement PayPals Acceptable Use Policy explicitly states that users must not engage in activities that are illegal or violate statutes and ordinances. Despite clear evidence that the seller violated federal and state laws, PayPal continues to facilitate their activities, contravening their own policy.

Federal Violations : Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ), 15 U.S.C. 1693 : Requires transparency and fairness in electronic transactions. PayPals failure to enforce its Acceptable Use Policy by continuing to allow illegal transactions affects the transparency and fairness required by the EFTA.

XXXX  Violations : FDUTPA, 501.204, XXXX. Stat. : Enforcing inconsistent policies and allowing a seller to continue operating illegally after a policy breach constitutes a deceptive practice under XXXX  law.

XXXX  Violations : UCL, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200 : Allowing the sellers illegal practices and refusing to enforce its own Acceptable Use Policy are fraudulent and unfair business practices in violation of UCL.

Supporting Case Law Examples FTC v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( 2016 ) : The FTC successfully sued XXXX  XXXX XXXX for deceptive practices in the telecommunications industry. This case underscores the authority of the FTC to act against businesses that fail to follow fair practices with consumers. 

Harris v. Nordyne , Inc. ( XXXX, 2015 ) : XXXX  courts ruled in favor of the plaintiff under FDUTPA, holding that misrepresentations and deceptive practices warrant consumer protection. This case highlights the power of XXXX consumer protection laws when companies act unfairly. 

Daugherty v. American Honda Motor Co. ( XXXX, 2006 ) : This XXXX  case held that a companys failure to disclose or enforce its own policies in a manner that harms consumers constitutes unfair competition under UCL, supporting similar claims against PayPal in XXXX. 

Requested Resolution Immediate Refund : I request an immediate refund of all funds associated with the illegal transactions involving the seller who violated PayPals Acceptable Use Policy. 
Policy Enforcement : I ask the CFPB to investigate PayPals failure to enforce its Acceptable Use Policy and ensure they establish a clear process for handling policy breaches. 

Improved Customer Support Access : I request that PayPal revise its policies to allow access to supervisors for consumer escalations involving legal or policy breaches. 

Compensation for Emotional Distress : Due to the stress, inconvenience, and time spent attempting to resolve these issues with XXXX, I request fair compensation for the undue hardship caused by their actions. 

XXXX has demonstrated a lack of commitment to enforcing its own policies, obstructing fair access to supervisors, and failing to process refunds in cases of documented policy violations. The refusal to address illegal activities by the seller, combined with obstructive practices, violates federal laws under the FTC, XXXX, and XXXX in Billing, as well as Florida and California consumer protection laws. I request the CFPBs immediate intervention to ensure that XXXX practices align with federal and state requirements and protect consumer rights.