Dispute Resolution Policy

1.0 Purpose

1.1 This policy explains how Paxtra handles Disputes between Buyers and Sellers. It applies to every Transaction made through the Platform, and forms part of the Paxtra Terms of Service.

1.2 Paxtra helps people deal more safely with each other. We are a technology and payment-facilitation platform. We are not a bank, we do not guarantee any Transaction, Buyer or Seller, we cannot remove all risk of fraud, and our Dispute process is not a court and does not replace one.

1.3 Our aim is simple: the same facts and the same evidence should generally lead to the same result, whoever the parties are. We do not favour Buyers or Sellers because of their role.

1.4 Every rule in this policy has a permanent number. Our decisions will say which numbers they rely on.

2.0 Before You Raise a Dispute

2.1 Communication first. Evidence second. Formal dispute last.

2.2 Before opening a Dispute, please try to sort the problem out directly with the other party through the Platform’s messages, in a reasonable and civil way. Many issues are a misunderstanding, a delay or a missing detail.

2.3 You do not have to try direct resolution first where doing so would be unsafe, inappropriate, impossible, potentially fraudulent or otherwise unreasonable. For example, the other party has threatened you, has stopped replying altogether, or is asking you to act outside the Platform.

2.4 Save your evidence now (see 4.1). Do not alter, crop or edit it.

2.5 Keep communications on the Platform where you can. We may give less weight to agreements made only outside it (see 4.2).

3.0 Who Can Raise a Dispute, and When

3.1 Who. A Buyer or a Seller who is a party to the Transaction may open a Dispute through the Platform. A Seller may open one only in the limited cases the Platform allows.

3.2 Eligible reasons. A Dispute may be opened for:

goods not received, or services not provided;

goods or services materially different from the Transaction Record;

the wrong item, a damaged item, an incomplete order or an incomplete service;

a counterfeit item, where the Transaction was for a genuine item;

a Seller’s failure to meet an agreed deadline;

a Buyer’s failure to confirm, respond or accept what was properly delivered (a Seller may raise this; see 10.0); and

any other reason that Paxtra accepts as connected to what was agreed in the Transaction.

3.3 Reasons that may not qualify. Changing your mind, a difference that is minor or was disclosed, a quality complaint that is only a matter of taste where the Transaction Record sets no objective standard, delay caused by the person raising the Dispute, and claims unrelated to the Transaction.

3.4 Deadlines. The time limits for opening a Dispute are in 12.0.

4.0 Evidence

4.1 Evidence requirements

4.1.1 What we may consider. We may consider the Transaction Record and the terms recorded in it; messages between the parties; the description of the goods or services; payment records; fulfilment and shipping records; tracking; delivery evidence; photographs; videos; receipts and invoices; timestamps; service deliverables; acceptance records; refund and cancellation communications; relevant third-party records; and any other reasonably relevant evidence.

4.1.2 Accepted formats. JPG, PNG, HEIC, PDF, MP4, MOV and TXT files, up to 25 MB each. If a file format or a technical limit stops you submitting evidence, tell us and we may accept it another way.

4.1.3 Originals preferred. Give us original and complete files where you can. We may ask for the original file, an uncropped version, or an export of the full conversation. Screenshots can be accepted but may carry less weight if they cannot be checked (see 4.2).

4.1.4 Do not alter evidence. Do not edit, crop, recolour, retouch or re-create evidence to make it look clearer. If something must be changed, tell us what you changed and why, and keep the original.

4.1.5 Redaction. You may hide private details (for example other people’s names, full card or account numbers, home addresses not relevant to the Dispute). You must say that the document is redacted, keep the unredacted original, and not hide information that matters to the Dispute. We may ask for the unredacted version.

4.1.6 Translations. If evidence is not in English or French, provide a translation and say who made it. We may rely on our own translation.

4.1.7 Metadata. Files may contain metadata such as date, device or location. We may examine it where legally permitted, as one input. A missing or stripped file date is not by itself proof of wrongdoing.

4.1.8 Third-party verification. We may ask you to give us, or to authorise us to obtain, confirmation directly from a third party such as a courier, bank or platform.

4.1.9 Relevance. Only submit what is reasonably relevant to the Dispute. We may ignore or return irrelevant material.

4.1.10 Privacy. Do not submit passwords, full card numbers, or sensitive information about yourself or others that is not needed. See the Paxtra Privacy Policy.

4.1.11 Prohibited evidence. We may decline evidence that was obtained unlawfully, that puts someone at risk, that includes private material about others without a good reason, or that is abusive or threatening.

4.1.12 Preserve originals. Keep the original evidence until the Dispute and any reconsideration are finished and for as long as you may need it for any external process. Paxtra keeps dispute evidence for 3 years after the case closes, unless a longer period is needed for regulatory obligations, legal proceedings, fraud investigations or enforceable claims, as set out in the Privacy Policy.

4.2 Evidence reliability

4.2.1 We look at the whole of the evidence, not at the number of documents each side submits. Evidence is not given equal weight. We consider where it came from, whether it can be checked, whether it was created at the time of events, whether it is complete and consistent, and whether it fits with other reliable information.

4.2.2 In general, and depending on the circumstances, more weight may be given to:

records generated within Paxtra;

records obtained directly from a Payment Provider;

carrier information we verify directly with the carrier;

independently verifiable third-party records;

communications made at the time of events;

original photographs or videos with intact details; and less weight to

documents supplied only as screenshots;

documents recreated after the event;

evidence that cannot be verified;

evidence that conflicts with other reliable information; and

evidence shown to be altered or manipulated.

4.2.3 No single kind of evidence is automatically conclusive, including our own records and those of third parties. Reviewers use internal guidance as a guide, not as a formula.

4.2.4 If one side gives stronger evidence, we may prefer it. If the evidence is evenly balanced or insufficient, 5.3 applies.

4.3 AI-generated and manipulated evidence

4.3.1 Generative AI and editing tools can produce convincing receipts, screenshots, conversations, emails, photographs, video, audio, delivery photos, tracking, shipping documents, identity documents, timestamps, signatures and deliverables. For that reason we may verify evidence and need not accept documents or screenshots at face value.

4.3.2 We distinguish carefully between:

legitimate AI-assisted content (for example, using AI to tidy the wording of an invoice that is otherwise true);

legitimate editing that does not change the material facts (for example, resizing, or redaction that is disclosed);

unverifiable evidence (which is weak, but is not dishonest);

misleadingly edited evidence;

deliberately fabricated or falsified evidence; and

impersonation or forged third-party records (for example, a fake courier delivery receipt).

4.3.3 Using AI is not a breach. Evidence does not lose a Dispute merely because it was created or edited with AI, or because an automated tool labels it AI-generated. Automated fraud or AI-detection tools may assist a review but are never conclusive by themselves.

4.3.4 Where evidence appears manipulated, we may ask the person who submitted it to explain, to give the original, or to give independent confirmation, and we will consider their response.

4.4 Fraudulent evidence

4.4.1 Rule. Knowingly submitting fabricated, forged, materially altered or intentionally misleading evidence, to influence a Dispute, is a serious violation of this policy. This applies however the evidence was made, including with generative AI, image or document editing, fabricated screenshots, altered metadata, manipulated messages, fabricated tracking, forged receipts, synthetic images, video or audio, impersonation or any other method.

4.4.2 Reasonable Basis needed. Suspicion alone is not enough. Paxtra must have a Reasonable Basis, based on reliable evidence, for concluding that the evidence was knowingly falsified.

4.4.3 What we may do. Where we reasonably determine that a party knowingly submitted materially Fraudulent Evidence, we may, as the circumstances justify and as the Terms and the law allow:

reject that evidence;

draw an adverse inference against that party;

decide the Dispute against that party where the falsification is material to the disputed issue;

restrict or suspend the account;

require more verification;

preserve relevant records;

restrict future access to Dispute features;

take action concerning the Transaction or payouts, where legally and technically permitted;

refer the matter to Payment Providers or other service providers where appropriate;

cooperate with lawful investigations; and

take any other action the Terms and the law permit.

4.4.4 Two separate decisions. We decide (a) the Dispute Outcome, which is about who is entitled to the money under the Transaction, and (b) any Misconduct Outcome, which is about what happens to the account. These are not the same. Where reliable independent evidence shows that a person was entitled to a refund or Payout, we may still decide that entitlement in their favour and, separately, act on their conduct. Where falsification affects the issue in dispute so that entitlement cannot be fairly decided in that person’s favour, 4.4.3 applies.

4.5 What happens if both parties submit false evidence?

4.5.1 We do not simply give the Dispute to whichever party lied less, and we do not reward one party’s fraud because the other also acted improperly.

4.5.2 If we reasonably conclude that both parties knowingly submitted materially falsified evidence, we may:

reject the falsified evidence of both;

assess whether any reliable independent evidence remains (for example, Paxtra and Payment Provider records, or carrier records we verify directly);

decline to rely on either party’s unsupported account;

suspend or restrict one or both accounts and conduct an enhanced review;

consider whether either party is abusing Paxtra;

preserve evidence;

decide the treatment of the Transaction and funds in line with the Terms, Payment Provider rules and applicable law; and

refer suspected fraud where appropriate.

4.5.3 If reliable independent evidence still establishes the underlying facts of the Transaction, we may decide the Dispute Outcome on that evidence and decide each party’s Misconduct Outcome separately.

4.5.4 If, because both parties have corrupted the evidence, entitlement cannot safely or lawfully be decided, we will suspend the ordinary decision and apply the fraud-review process instead of choosing a winner. During the review we may restrict the transfer of the proceeds where our payment arrangements and the law allow, and ask for independently verifiable evidence. Where the transaction cannot be reliably validated and nothing legally prevents it, refunding the Buyer may be the appropriate outcome. This is not guaranteed in every case, because chargebacks, payment-provider restrictions or competing legal claims may affect what is available. If the transaction is fully refunded for this reason, Paxtra ordinarily waives its fee, subject to mandatory law and the Fee Schedule.

4.6 Accusations that evidence is forged

4.6.1 A party cannot win simply by saying “their evidence was made by AI” or “it is fake”. An allegation that evidence is fabricated needs a Reasonable Basis, such as a specific inconsistency, a conflicting independent record or a failed verification.

4.6.2 We review allegations of fabrication as we review any other claim. An unsupported accusation does not reduce the weight of the other party’s evidence, and an automated AI-detection result alone is not determinative.

4.6.3 Knowingly making a false allegation that another person’s evidence is fraudulent, or submitting manipulated “proof” of that, may itself be abuse of the Dispute system (see 15.0).

4.7 Conflicts between user evidence and independent records

4.7.1 Where a screenshot or document supplied by a party conflicts with a reliable record generated directly by Paxtra, a Payment Provider, a carrier or another independently verifiable system, we may generally give greater weight to the independently verifiable record, depending on context.

4.7.2 Third-party systems are not infallible. A party may show that an external record is wrong, incomplete or relates to something else, and we will consider it.

5.0 Standard of Decision and Burden of Evidence

5.1 Standard of decision

5.1.1 We decide on the balance of probabilities: whether, based on the reliable evidence available, one version of events is more likely than not to be true.

5.1.2 This is how we apply it:

5.1.3 We do not invent a result because we cannot tell what happened.

5.2 Burden of evidence

5.2.1 There is no single universal burden. As a general principle, the party who asserts a material fact should normally provide reasonable evidence for it where that evidence would ordinarily be available to them.

5.2.2 In practice, what we expect depends on what is claimed:

Non-delivery. The Seller should normally show that the goods were sent to the agreed address, and verifiable delivery. The Buyer should normally show what they say happened (for example, that they did not receive it, with relevant messages and details).

Not as described. The Buyer should normally show how what they received differs from the Transaction Record, with clear photos or video. The Seller should normally show what was actually sent and that it matched the description.

Service not completed. The Seller should normally show what was delivered against the agreed scope. The Buyer should normally show what was agreed and what is missing.

Cancellation. Each party should show when fulfilment began, and the party who says it began should normally show that.

Returns. The party who says goods were sent back should normally show dispatch, and the party who says they were not received should explain why.

5.2.3 The more serious or unusual the claim, the stronger the evidence we expect.

5.3 Insufficient evidence

5.3.1 If, after a fair review and after giving each party a chance to provide more evidence, we cannot reasonably decide which version is more likely true, we will issue an Insufficient-Evidence Outcome. We will say so plainly and will not treat it as a finding against either party.

5.3.2 Before issuing it, we will normally: tell both parties what is missing; allow a final opportunity to provide it (within the deadlines in 12.0); and invite a voluntary settlement.

5.3.3 An Insufficient-Evidence Outcome does not affect either party’s account standing unless 4.4, 4.5 or 15.0 applies.

5.3.4 If no settlement is reached, we decide according to the nature of the dispute, the transaction terms and the evidence available, and may apply the contractual risk-allocation rules, subject to the law. For example: where a Seller cannot establish delivery of goods or performance of a service, the Buyer will ordinarily be favoured; where credible delivery evidence exists but the Buyer’s claim is not supported, the Seller may be favoured; and in quality or misrepresentation disputes we look at the original agreement, the relevant communications and the alleged failure. Proof of delivery does not necessarily show that goods matched the agreement, and proof that a service took place does not show that every agreed requirement was met. We do not promise a result based only on the presence or absence of one type of evidence.

6.0 Dispute Categories

6.1 Physical goods

6.1.1 Item not received. We expect the Seller to show dispatch to the agreed address and verifiable tracking or delivery evidence. A tracking number or screenshot is not conclusive by itself (see 6.1.2).

6.1.2 Tracking says delivered, Buyer says not received. We do not treat a tracking screenshot as conclusive. We may consider: tracking checked directly with the carrier; the delivery location and whether it matches the agreed address; any signature; delivery photos or location evidence where legitimately available; the Buyer’s messages and explanation; any carrier investigation; and other surrounding evidence.

6.1.3 Not as described, wrong item or counterfeit. We compare what the Buyer received with the Transaction Record. A difference must be material. For counterfeit items we may require independent confirmation of authenticity or lack of it.

6.1.4 Damaged item. The Buyer should show the condition on arrival, including the packaging, with photos or video taken promptly. The Seller may show how it was packed and sent.

6.1.5 Incomplete order. We compare what was agreed with what arrived. We may order a partial outcome (13.2).

6.1.6 Delivery to the wrong address. If goods went to an address other than the one agreed, the Seller is normally responsible, unless the Buyer gave the wrong address or later changed it. If the Buyer gave an incorrect address, the Buyer is normally responsible.

6.1.7 Buyer refuses delivery. We consider why. A refusal without a good reason, for goods that match the Transaction Record, does not entitle the Buyer to a Refund.

6.1.8 Seller ships late. We compare the shipping date with the agreed timeline. Late delivery may justify cancellation or a partial outcome, depending on the agreed terms and whether time was important.

6.1.9 Buyer claims an empty package or missing contents. We may ask for the full unboxing evidence, the weight on the carrier’s label or records, the packaging, and the Seller’s evidence of what was packed.

6.1.10 Returns. We apply the return rules in the Terms and the Transaction Record. The party who says goods were sent back should show dispatch, and we may require tracking and proof of receipt.

6.1.11 Personalised or custom goods. Where the Transaction Record clearly records the specification, we judge the goods against it. Such goods may not be returnable for change of mind, but this does not remove statutory rights or the Buyer’s right to goods that match the agreement.

6.2 Services

6.2.1 The original scope matters most. For service disputes, the scope, deliverables, deadlines and milestones recorded in the Transaction are the starting point.

6.2.2 Service not provided or incomplete. The Seller should show what was done against the agreed scope. The Buyer should show what was agreed and what is missing.

6.2.3 Materially different service. The difference must be material and measurable against the agreed scope.

6.2.4 Missed deadline. We look at the agreed deadline, any agreed extension, and whether the Buyer caused the delay.

6.2.5 Quality disagreements. A disagreement over quality is decided against the standard in the Transaction Record. Where the agreement sets no objective standard, subjective dissatisfaction alone is not normally enough for a Refund, but a result that is clearly unfit for the agreed purpose may be.

6.2.6 Scope creep and changing requirements. A Seller is not required to deliver work outside the agreed scope. If a Buyer changes the requirements after payment, the change should be agreed in the Transaction. Changes agreed only in messages may be considered, but may carry less weight.

6.2.7 Milestones and partial completion. Where the Transaction has milestones, we assess each one. Partial completion may support a partial outcome (13.2).

6.2.8 Buyer refuses completed work. We consider whether the work met the agreed scope. A Buyer cannot refuse work that matches the agreed scope.

6.2.9 Digital deliverables. We may consider file delivery records, access logs, version history and the files themselves.

7.0 Buyer Responsibilities

7.1 Buyers must:

review the Transaction Record before paying, and make sure it matches the agreement;

give accurate information;

communicate reasonably;

inspect goods or work promptly;

not confirm before receiving and accepting what was agreed;

save evidence and keep originals;

raise problems within the time limits in 12.0;

cooperate with reasonable requests for information;

not fabricate or manipulate evidence;

not use Disputes to get goods or services for free, and not falsely claim non-delivery; and

not raise inconsistent claims dishonestly across more than one channel.

7.2 Nothing in this policy removes statutory consumer rights.

8.0 Seller Responsibilities

8.1 Sellers must:

describe goods and services accurately, including condition and the scope of any service;

agree deadlines and meet them;

ship to the agreed address, and keep proof of dispatch;

use tracking that can be verified, and appropriate tracking for higher-risk Transactions;

keep evidence of delivery or completion;

keep communications and records for as long as the Transaction may be disputed;

cooperate with Disputes;

not fabricate delivery or fulfilment evidence;

not pressure a Buyer to confirm before fulfilment; and

not change the terms after payment without the Buyer’s agreement.

8.2 Shipping physical goods. Physical goods worth more than C$250 should ordinarily be shipped using tracked delivery with signature confirmation, where reasonably available. This applies to physical goods, not to services or digital deliverables. Signature confirmation does not prove that an item matched its description.

9.0 Buyer Confirmation

9.1 What confirmation means. Confirmation is the Buyer’s statement, made on the Platform, that they have received what was agreed and accept it. Buyers should confirm only after receiving and accepting what was agreed. Confirmation normally leads to Release.

9.2 Accidental confirmation. If a Buyer confirms by mistake, they should tell us immediately. We will consider the circumstances, including how quickly the Buyer raised it and whether funds have already been released.

9.3 Pressure or deception. If confirmation was obtained through pressure, threats or deception, we may disregard it, and the conduct may be abuse under 15.0.

9.4 Problems found after confirmation. If a Buyer finds a problem after confirming that they could not reasonably have found earlier (a latent defect), they may ask us to review it. We will consider it, but funds may already have been released (see 18.0).

9.5 Later change of mind. A change of mind after confirmation is not a ground for a Dispute.

9.6 Verbal confirmation. A Seller’s claim that the Buyer confirmed verbally, or outside the Platform, is not a confirmation on the Platform. We may consider messages outside the Platform as evidence of what the parties said, and weigh them under 4.2.

9.7 Statutory and payment rights. Confirmation does not by itself remove rights under the law, or the rights a Buyer may have through their bank or card issuer.

10.0 Buyer Non-Response

10.1 The problem. A Seller may say the order was delivered or the work completed, and the Buyer does not confirm, does not open a Dispute and cannot be reached. We will not hold a legitimate Seller’s money indefinitely, and we will not release it just because the Seller says they delivered.

10.2 Process. Where the Buyer does not respond, we will normally:

check that the Transaction is funded and that the Seller has given evidence of dispatch, delivery or completion;

send the Buyer clear notice and reminders, using the contact details on the Buyer’s account, telling them what will happen if they do not respond and by when;

check our records and independently verifiable records (including carrier records) for delivery or completion;

if the Buyer still does not respond after the notice period, review the Seller’s evidence under 4.0 and 5.0; and

then, if the evidence supports it, make an administrative decision to release, which the Buyer can still challenge under 14.0 if it was based on an error or the Buyer could not reasonably have responded.

10.3 A Seller’s statement of delivery without supporting evidence is not enough on its own.

10.4 Release conditions. If the Buyer does not respond within 7 calendar days after the first fulfilment notice, we may authorise release only where: the agreed Review Period has expired; there is credible evidence of delivery or service completion; no Dispute is open; no material fraud indicators exist; no payment-provider restriction prevents release; and release is permitted under the transaction terms. For services, the Seller’s own statement that the work is complete is not by itself proof of completion. We do not promise that every unconfirmed transaction will be released automatically after seven days.

10.5 Nothing in this section removes a Buyer’s statutory rights or rights through their bank or card issuer.

11.0 Cancellations and Refunds

11.1 Before fulfilment. A Transaction may normally be cancelled by agreement, or by the Seller at any time, with a Refund of the Transaction Amount. A Buyer’s unilateral cancellation before the Seller has started is subject to the Terms and the Transaction Record.

11.2 After work begins or goods ship. Once goods have shipped or work has started, the Buyer cannot cancel unilaterally. The Buyer’s route is a Dispute under 3.0. A Seller who has already incurred costs may ask us to consider them (see 11.4).

11.3 Custom goods, digital goods and partial services. The Transaction Record and the evidence of work done are the starting point. Custom or digital goods that match the Transaction Record may not be refundable for a change of mind.

11.4 Non-refundable costs. Costs may be non-refundable only where the Transaction Record clearly agreed that, and where the law allows.

11.5 Seller-initiated cancellation and refunds. A Seller may cancel or agree a full or partial Refund at any time through the Platform.

11.6 Refunds after Release or Payout. After funds have been released or paid out, Paxtra may attempt recovery through Stripe’s supported mechanisms, the connected-account arrangements or other lawful recovery procedures. Depending on the account configuration, this may involve balance adjustments, transfer reversals or contractual repayment obligations. Paxtra does not guarantee recovery. Paxtra’s responsibility to the Buyer is set by applicable law, the transaction agreement and payment-network obligations.

11.7 Statutory rights. Nothing in this policy removes consumer rights that cannot lawfully be waived. We do not set a universal return period here.

12.0 Deadlines and Process

12.1 The time limits below apply.

12.2 Extensions. We may allow a reasonable extension where justified by exceptional circumstances, technical problems, accessibility needs or the availability of third-party evidence. We may extend our own review period once, by up to 5 Business Days, with notice to the parties. Where legal requirements, payment-network procedures or investigations make further delay unavoidable, we will explain the situation and keep you updated. Cases involving fraud, financial institutions, law enforcement or complex evidence may take longer, and we do not promise that every Dispute is resolved within a fixed number of days. Ask before a deadline expires if you can.

12.3 Missed deadlines. If a party misses a deadline after adequate notice, we may decide the Dispute without their evidence, and may treat a missing response as less persuasive. Non-response alone does not automatically decide the outcome. We may still allow late evidence where it is important, was not reasonably available earlier, and the other party is not unfairly harmed. These time limits do not override statutory consumer rights, card-network dispute rights or other mandatory legal protections.

12.4 Holds. Paxtra may delay, restrict or suspend the transfer or payout of disputed transaction proceeds to the extent permitted by our payment-processing arrangements, applicable agreements and law. Paxtra does not operate an independent escrow service or hold funds in a dedicated trust account.

13.0 Outcomes

13.1 Possible outcomes

13.1.1 Where legally and technically supported, a Dispute may end in: Release to the Seller; a full Refund; a partial Refund; an agreed settlement; cancellation; a request for further evidence; an Insufficient-Evidence Outcome; enhanced verification; referral for fraud review; or any other outcome the Terms and the law allow.

13.1.2 Separate Misconduct Outcomes, such as account restriction, suspension or termination, are decided under 4.4, 4.5, 15.0 and 17.0 and are explained separately.

13.1.3 Paxtra’s powers over funds are those set out in the Terms and allowed by the law and the payment arrangements. We do not claim any wider power.

13.2 Partial outcomes

13.2.1 A partial outcome may be appropriate where, for example, part of an order is missing, a service was partly completed, the parties agree a partial Refund, or a quantifiable part of the agreed service was not delivered.

13.2.2 We do not use arbitrary percentages. A partial outcome is tied to the evidence and to the value of the unfulfilled portion, where that can reasonably be worked out from the Transaction Record (for example the price of the missing item, or the price of the unfinished milestone).

13.2.3 Paxtra’s fee. Paxtra’s fee is not collected on amounts refunded to the Buyer before release. For a partial refund, the fee applies at the same rate to the amount released to the Seller, and never exceeds that amount. After release the fee is not returned, including if the Seller later refunds the Buyer.

14.0 Reconsideration

14.1 A party may ask us to reconsider a decision once, within 7 calendar days of receiving the Decision Notice, where there is:

a material error in the original decision;

relevant new evidence that was not reasonably available before;

a procedural irregularity; or

evidence of fraud or deliberate misrepresentation.

14.2 Simply disagreeing with the decision is not enough. A request must say which ground applies and give the new information. Reconsideration does not extend any deadline unless we say so, and does not by itself pause a Payout unless we decide otherwise.

14.3 Someone who did not make the original decision will consider the request, wherever reasonably practicable. We will tell you the result in writing. Reconsideration does not remove any external legal, regulatory or payment-network rights.

14.4 Once funds have been paid out, we may not be able to change the financial result.

15.0 Abuse of the Dispute System

15.1 The following are abuse of the Dispute system:

repeated, knowingly false Disputes;

collusion or conspiracy between Buyer and Seller, and self-dealing;

fabricated Transactions, fake delivery and false non-delivery claims;

forged or manipulated evidence;

coercion, threats, or harassment of the other party or Paxtra staff;

using multiple accounts to evade restrictions;

manipulating Paxtra Disputes and chargebacks, for example claiming a Refund through Paxtra and then also through an External Payment Dispute; and

trying to interfere with evidence.

15.2 We may take proportionate action, as the Terms and the law allow, including rejecting the Dispute or evidence, restricting Dispute features, requiring verification, restricting, suspending or closing accounts (including linked accounts), and taking action concerning funds where legally and technically permitted. We will consider how serious and how repeated the conduct is, and whether it was deliberate.

16.0 Chargebacks and External Processes

16.1 This policy is separate from External Payment Disputes, Stripe’s and other Payment Providers’ processes, bank disputes, consumer-protection bodies, law enforcement, courts and regulators.

16.2 If you open both a Paxtra Dispute and an External Payment Dispute for the same Transaction, tell us. We may pause, close or continue the Paxtra Dispute, share information with the Payment Provider and card network, and treat the claims together. The Payment Provider or card network may decide the external claim differently from us, and its decision may override ours on the movement of funds.

16.3 Making an inconsistent or dishonest claim through both routes may be abuse (15.0).

16.4 Nothing in this policy states that Paxtra’s decision overrides legal, statutory or card-network rights.

17.0 Fraud and Criminal Activity

17.1 Where we have a credible basis to suspect fraud, identity theft, forged documents, account takeover, collusion or criminal activity, we may: investigate; restrict accounts; ask for verification; preserve records; cooperate with Payment Providers; comply with lawful requests; and report matters where the law requires or where we consider it appropriate.

17.2 We do not promise to report every suspected incident to the police, and you may report to the police yourself.

18.0 Paxtra’s Role and Limits

18.1 Paxtra was generally not present for the off-platform conversation, cannot inspect goods, may not see delivery, and cannot always work out every disputed fact. We rely partly on information provided by users and on independent records, and may have to decide on incomplete evidence.

18.2 We cannot guarantee recovery of money after funds have been paid out, and we cannot guarantee that either party will be satisfied with a decision.

18.3 Our decisions are not arbitrary. They are made under this policy, the Terms, Payment Provider requirements and the law.

19.0 Consistency, Review and Decision Notices

19.1 Consistency. We aim to apply this policy consistently. Each Dispute is decided on its own facts, and past outcomes are not binding precedent because evidence and circumstances differ.

19.2 Conflicts of interest. A Reviewer does not decide a Dispute where they have a material conflict of interest.

19.3 Human review and escalation. Materially contested Disputes that need an assessment of evidence are reviewed by a person. Simple administrative cases may follow standard workflows, and we do not promise that every routine step is done by hand. Decisions involving allegations of fraud, permanent termination or complex evidence receive meaningful human oversight. Enhanced review applies to Disputes over C$250, and wherever there are indicators of fraud, coercion, repeated disputes or serious misconduct. Initial review is by Paxtra’s designated dispute reviewer. Escalations and reconsiderations are handled by a senior reviewer who did not make the original decision.

19.4 Decision Notices. Every final decision will explain, in plain language: the issue considered; the policy provision relied on; the key evidence relied on; material evidence rejected and why, where appropriate; the conclusion; the Transaction outcome; any next step or reconsideration option; and any separate account action. For example:

Decision: [Outcome] Policy relied upon: Section X.X Key finding: [Finding] Evidence considered: [Summary] Reason: [Plain-language explanation] What happens next: [Release / refund / other]

20.0 General Terms

20.1 Limits of our Dispute role. We review the information reasonably available to us. We cannot independently verify every fact. You are responsible for preserving your evidence.

20.2 False information and misuse. Giving false information or misusing this process is a breach of the Terms (see 4.4 and 15.0).

20.3 Requests for information and declining evidence. We may ask for more information at any time, and may decline evidence that is irrelevant, unsafe or unlawfully obtained.

20.4 Account restrictions. We may restrict an account as the Terms allow.

20.5 Changes. We may update this policy. A Dispute is decided under the version in force when it was opened, unless the law or a Payment Provider requires otherwise, or the new version is more favourable to the user.

20.6 Relationship to the Terms. This policy forms part of the Paxtra Terms of Service. If they conflict on the same subject, the Terms prevail unless this policy is more favourable to you.

20.7 Applicable law and mandatory rights. The Terms set the governing law. If any part of this policy conflicts with a mandatory legal right, the legal right prevails. Nothing here limits non-waivable consumer rights.

20.8 Other markets. This policy is written for Canada. At launch, Paxtra’s live payment services are planned for eligible Canadian provinces, excluding Quebec. Before Paxtra operates in Quebec or any other market, the deadlines, consumer rights, language requirements, evidence rules and payment rules in this policy will be reviewed and adjusted for that market.

21.0 Contact

Questions about this policy: support@usepaxtra.com. Paxtra Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

22.0 Future Trust Score and Account Reliability Assessments

22.1 Status. Paxtra plans to introduce a Trust Score, or similar account reliability assessment, in the future. It is not part of the initial pilot, it is not operating today, and Paxtra does not currently generate Trust Scores. This section explains how Paxtra expects to approach it, so that users know what to expect. It does not create a Trust Score now.

22.2 Purpose. The proposed purpose is to encourage responsible behaviour, improve transparency, and help identify patterns of trustworthy or potentially risky activity.

22.3 Who may be assessed. Buyers, Sellers, freelancers, service providers and business account holders. An assessment would look at relevant conduct associated with an account. It would not make unsupported assumptions about a person’s character.

22.4 Conduct that could contribute. The kinds of conduct that may count are:

22.5 What would not count against anyone. A user would not lose standing simply because they opened a Dispute in good faith, took part in a Dispute, won a Dispute in good faith, received an outcome they did not like, or were the subject of an allegation that was not supported by proof of misconduct. The assessment must tell genuine misconduct apart from misunderstandings, honest mistakes and legitimate consumer complaints.

22.6 Dispute outcome is not a fraud finding. Losing a Dispute does not mean that someone acted dishonestly. A finding of fraud or deliberate falsification needs a Reasonable Basis under 4.4 and is decided separately from the Dispute Outcome, as 4.4.4 explains.

22.7 Disputed evidence and confirmed fraud. Evidence that is only disputed, unverifiable or weak does not by itself affect an assessment. Only misconduct that has been confirmed on reliable evidence, after the user has had a fair chance to respond, could be taken into account.

22.8 Human oversight. Decisions that significantly affect a user, such as a restriction, a lower transaction limit or extra verification, would involve meaningful human review. They would not be made only by an automated score.

22.9 Challenging an assessment. Users would be able to ask for access to the information used, ask for correction of anything inaccurate, and ask for a review, through the Complaints Procedure and the reconsideration approach in 14.0. We would tell you the result in writing.

22.10 Methodology and approvals. The scoring method, the factors and how they are weighted will be set and approved before the feature is switched on, and are not set out here. Any decision that significantly affects access to payment services, account restrictions or transaction limits will first go through legal and privacy review.

22.11 Notice and privacy. Before activation, Paxtra will give users clear notice, update the Privacy Policy and Terms, and explain what personal information is used, whether scoring is automated, whether people can review it, whether scores are visible to other users, how long scoring information is kept, whether third parties receive it, and how to exercise privacy rights.

22.12 No promised benefits. Paxtra may in future use assessments to inform account reliability indicators, eligibility for higher transaction limits, extra verification, risk-based reviews or account restrictions, after approval. A higher score would not automatically mean faster payouts, lower fees or guaranteed approval of a transaction, and no benefit is advertised until it has been built and approved.

22.13 Other rules unchanged. This section does not change the deadlines, payment-release conditions, reconsideration rights or evidence requirements in the rest of this policy, and it does not override statutory rights.