Clients can successfully chargeback work periods

[samuelwharvey]

Clients can charge back work periods when the Freelancer is working on certain tasks that are key to the task. 

I frequently work -

1) developing mobile applications 

2) working with connected devices

When developing these I will be doing tasks like -

1) testing the mobile app on the phone

2) downloading/interacting with competitor/reference apps

3) interacting with the device - watch, fitness tracker etc.

Few keystrokes will be input in these periods and the Client can claim back thes periods for low activity. 

This leaves myself very exposed. A Client clyde charge back a large percentage of my week. 

I have spoken to Support on this but they are not interested in escalating this through and allowing an open direct conversation to resolve this issue so it does not continue.

[jeremiah-brown]

What about allowing freelancers to submit a video of themselves performing the off screen work in the event there is a dispute?  For example, lets say that I have an offscreen project that I need to work on.  Since I am working on this at a fixed rate, I lose the hourly payment protection.  To combat transaction abuses, I set up a camera that films me while I work, an insurance policy if you will.  The client disputes the amount of time because they're cheap and don't want to pay.  The freelancer should be able to submit the video to Upwork for review as a counter dispute to the client.  

[fkupwork]

I don't believe it will help you much with the current policies. I haven't worked on a fixed-priced contract for a while now. But if I ever do in the future, I will definitely charge a certain amount of UpFront Milestone Release and another milestone funded. 

UpWork do recommend negotiating: https://support.upwork.com/hc/en-us/articles/211063018-Interview-and-Negotiate

[gilbert-phyllis]

---

Jeremiah B wrote:

What about allowing freelancers to submit a video of themselves performing the off screen work in the event there is a dispute?  For example, lets say that I have an offscreen project that I need to work on.  Since I am working on this at a fixed rate, I lose the hourly payment protection.  To combat transaction abuses, I set up a camera that films me while I work, an insurance policy if you will.  The client disputes the amount of time because they're cheap and don't want to pay.  The freelancer should be able to submit the video to Upwork for review as a counter dispute to the client.  

---

UW doesn't review materials and settle disputes. UW mediates, which means encouraging client and FL to negotiate a mutually acceptable outcome. Failing that, the dispute goes to arbitration. That is where a video such as you describe could potentially come into play. 

[prestonhunter]

Upwork is not going to offer Upwork Payment Protection using a checkbox or submitted video as a substitution for logging time using the desktop time-tracker.

[researchediting]

I'm not sure of the point of your post, Preston.

Phyllis was responding to a proposal about the dispute process,  and pointed out that Upwork doesn't review user-submitted materials. (It's my understanding they don't even examine the work record, except perhaps in the most specific circumstances).

Phyllis was specifically pointing out that the hypothetical video evidence being suggested would never be considered by Upwork.

Arbitration, where Phyllis said such evidence "could potentially come into play," is a legally binding, quasi-judicial process done by a third party, not by Upwork.

[prestonhunter]

Douglas:

I agree with Phyllis.

I was not responding to her post.

I was responding to the thread as a whole.

I appreciate the individuals who are thinking outside the box and offering concrete ideas for what they feel is a potential problem.

But Upwork is not going to allow a checkbox or videos as a substitute for the desktop-time tracker.

[researchediting]

Thanks for clarifying, Preston. Indeed, I found the reference to a checkbox (that you were probably responding to) many posts away. It would be nice if Upwork would restore order to the forum so that such misapprehensions did not plague us and we could get back to focusing on the issues.

Best,

Michael

[feed_my_eyes]

---

Jeremiah B wrote:

Since I am working on this at a fixed rate, I lose the hourly payment protection. 

---

You don't have the guarantee that Upwork will automatically pay you if the client doesn't, but you do have the money in escrow and the client can't just decide not to pay; you go to mediation in the event of a dispute and if that doesn't work, arbitration. Clients who are merely cheapskates and don't have a good reason for a dispute aren't going to pay an additional $291 for arbitration (in the majority of cases). In that case, saying that you have video proof of you working probably would strengthen your case.

Also keep in mind that hourly payment protection is limited to $2,500 per client. If you work on projects that are worth more than this, you won't be protected by Upwork even if you do track your hours properly, in which case, having the money in escrow for a fixed price project might give more peace of mind.

[a_lipsey]

---

Christine A wrote:

Also keep in mind that hourly payment protection is limited to $2,500 per client. If you work on projects that are worth more than this, you won't be protected by Upwork even if you do track your hours properly, in which case, having the money in escrow for a fixed price project might give more peace of mind.

---

And there's the crux for many of us. As I raise my rate, each project is easily going over $2500. I have a new contract that I expect to max that out in the next week or so, and it's at least a 6 month if not much longer project (hooray to that too, btw). I have really never been in much of a position to use Upwork like an insurance policy so I have always carefully vetted my clients and considered the risk in terms of where they are located and what jurisdiction they are in, should I need to address things through small claims or otherwise. Doing this due diligence and setting standards/criteria for what I can accept as a client has thus far kept me paid. Even with escrow, it doesn't make much difference for me, other than the offered arbitration service from Upwork, versus with hourly having to address it differently. 

Upwork offers limited payment protection - but the Upwork commission is not an insurance payment, and really should not be treated as such. That's a dangerous model. I know some freelancers use it that way - and the ones I know who do are aware they do and are aware of what the risks are and what they are doing. I'd say if that's part of your business model, then own up to the fact that it's not intended that way and you are using it that way - so you can be better prepared for all the possibilities of things that may happen. 

(you =/= Christine; you = general public)

[wlyonsatl]

Amanda,

I don't think the $2.500 limit applies to the total value of a project's entire history.

Upwork will advise a freelancer to stop working on a project when it appears there is a problem with a client's payment method. If a client has already paid you in full $3,000 for work on their project and you book $500 in the current week when Upwprk advises you to stop work, then the $2,500 limit applies to that $500, not the total of $3,500 you have booked on the project.

The $2,500 lifetime iimit applies to the amount Upwork must pay to honor ongoing weekly pay for hourly unpaid amounts by a client. It those add up to more than $2,500 then Upwork says it caps its liability at $2,500.

I don't know of any public document in which Upwork addresses the case in which a client's payments  exceeding $2,500 for an hourly contract that were originally paid in full by the client are later clawed back by the bank that issued the client's credit card. I assume that Upwork fights the clawed back claim and ultimately eats the net cost of recovery rather than pursue the freelancer to pay it back, as long as the freelancer did not play a role in the client's fraud.

And what Upwork offers is a type of insurance, which freelancers pay for through the Upwork fees they pay and from which freelancers with payment problems on hourly projects are allowed to make a limited amount of withdrawals in certain circumstances.

[a_lipsey]

Will, I am aware what the limits are on hourly payment protection and how they work. 

The fees we pay to Upwork are for a number of things, including marketing to attract clients, the use and maintenance of the platform itself, and customer support, to name a few. The fees are not for an "insurance policy". There is no way that such a small amount would cover such an insurance policy. As I said, payment protection is limited, and is openly limited. It should not be treated like an insurance policy. 

[gilbert-phyllis]

---

Will L wrote:

Amanda,

I don't think the $2.500 limit applies to the total value of a project's entire history.

Upwork will advise a freelancer to stop working on a project when it appears there is a problem with a client's payment method. If a client has already paid you in full $3,000 for work on their project and you book $500 in the current week when Upwprk advises you to stop work, then the $2,500 limit applies to that $500, not the total of $3,500 you have booked on the project.

The $2,500 lifetime iimit applies to the amount Upwork must pay to honor ongoing weekly pay for hourly unpaid amounts by a client. It those add up to more than $2,500 then Upwork says it caps its liability at $2,500.

I don't know of any public document in which Upwork addresses the case in which a client's payments  exceeding $2,500 for an hourly contract that were originally paid in full by the client are later clawed back by the bank that issued the client's credit card. I assume that Upwork fights the clawed back claim and ultimately eats the net cost of recovery rather than pursue the freelancer to pay it back, as long as the freelancer did not play a role in the client's fraud.

And what Upwork offers is a type of insurance, which freelancers pay for through the Upwork fees they pay and from which freelancers with payment problems on hourly projects are allowed to make a limited amount of withdrawals in certain circumstances.

---

In your example, the FL would use still be eligible for $2,000 worth of payment protection should the same client fail to pay their invoice again. This is how I have understood the policy works and you've confirmed it anecdotally -- if I recall correctly, you had a client who dropped the ball on payment three times, right? And today you shared that you actually managed to obtain coverage exceeding $2,500 on at least one occasion.

So, the number I would be most interested in knowing is how much UW has spent making good on payment protection for FLs who knowingly continue working with deadbeat clients, secure in the knowledge UW will cover their losses. I agree with Amanda, the fees we pay are not meant to provide insurance against that kind of preventable loss. I was less than half serious a few days ago when I mentioned the idea of capping an individual FL's access to that kind of payment protection based on repeated claims. But now I'm thinking it might not be a bad idea. If we're going to think of it as insurance, then fine -- we all know we're subject to a premium increase on our car insurance after an at-fault accident or repeated accidents or traffic violations. 

[wlyonsatl]

Christine,

I know from experience the $2,500 limit is more of a guideline than a hard limit. Upwork employees make the final decision, not an algorithm.

And we've been told on this message boart that Upwork may not allow disputes on small projects to go to arbitration - presumably where Upwork's own $291 cost for each arbitration ecxeeds the fees Upwork has earned or has at risk in the underlying project.

[petra_r]

---

Will L wrote:

And we've been told on this message boart that Upwork may not allow disputes on small projects to go to arbitration 

---

We really haven't been told that Upwork don't allow such disputes to go to arbitration. I know the post you claim says something like that when really it doesn't and the freelancer even states that he agreed to a proposed settlement rather than push ahead with arbitration, which he did not have to because proposed solutions suggested to resolve dispute mediation are non-binding by definition.

Feel free to read the relevant parts of the terms of service.

---

Will L wrote:

presumably

---

Not even "presumably".

[feed_my_eyes]

---

Will L wrote:

And we've been told on this message boart that Upwork may not allow disputes on small projects to go to arbitration - presumably where Upwork's own $291 cost for each arbitration ecxeeds the fees Upwork has earned or has at risk in the underlying project.

---

In every post that I've read involving small payments and unresolved disputes, arbitration is avoided because Upwork pays the freelancer out of their own pocket and also refunds the client, thus settling the matter. That counts as payment protection as well, doesn't it?

---

Will L wrote:

I know from experience the $2,500 limit is more of a guideline than a hard limit. Upwork employees make the final decision, not an algorithm.

---

That's certainly interesting to learn, and I thank you for correcting me. Would you mind sharing the upper limit that you've experienced so far?

[wlyonsatl]

Christine,

It wasn't so much over the stated $2,500 limit that I would suggest anyone use a number above $2,500 in assessing their own risk of loss due to non-payment by the client on an hourly project.

A freelancer with a lower value project payment problem should be happy to get an offer from Upwork to accept a mediated offer of less than the total amount owed to them rather than spend $291 going to arbitration. The exact number a particular freelancer would accept would depend on the value of the project and the freelancer's appetite for the risk of going to arbitration and "winning" less than the value of the project - maybe even much less.

For example, if the freelancer feels he's due $300 that the client won't agree to pay, it makes more sense for the freelancer to accept only $100 in payment (regardless whether the client pays it or Upwork pays it out of its own pocket), rather than for the freelancer to pay $291 in the hopes of winning $300 at arbitration.

The client may or may not be out $100 (instead of $300) in such an arrangement but everybody, including Upwork, has avoided paying out $291 for arbitration. 

It makes no commercial sense for Upwork to pay $291 on a project where its own fees have been well under that amount. Considering that Upwork reported a loss of $33.7 million for the nine months ended 9/30/21, of which the provision for transaction losses was $3.7 million, Upwork would, in my opinion, be happy to spend something less out of its own pocket than the $291 for arbitration on projects below a certain value.

I doubt the decision is always based on the economics of a particular project, but I'd expect those considerations would play a role in that decision.