"It's perfectly reasonable for Paypal to decide their own business model."
The same could be said for just about every other business that fails.
And I don't believe that is reasonable to freeze transactions of business based solely on some sort of suspicion of guilt, then after it has been resolved that they are indeed innocent, continue to hold their money for months after the fact.
The horror stories of paypay have been floating around for some years, this story is nothing new.
It's not a case of black-and-white innocent-or-not, an account has a certain level of risk associated with it and Paypal has to manage that.
Paypal didn't think they were fraudsters when they suspended their account, they thought they were high-risk. They unsuspended the account when the event organizer agreed to some risk mitigation measures (allowing Paypal to hold the money for the length of the creditcard chargeback period to let Paypal protect themselves).
The same could be said for just about every other business that fails.
And I don't believe that is reasonable to freeze transactions of business based solely on some sort of suspicion of guilt, then after it has been resolved that they are indeed innocent, continue to hold their money for months after the fact.
The horror stories of paypay have been floating around for some years, this story is nothing new.