- How often
- Never, whatever the explanation and whatever the history.
- Cost of following it
- Slightly slower settlement, and occasionally a small discount forgone.
- What it prevents
- A loss with no dispute, no appeal, no partial and no process of any kind.
- Why people break it
- It arrives inside a normal exchange, after messages have been swapped and an impression formed. Refusing feels like an accusation.
- If you already did
- There is no mechanism. Keep the record, report the account, and do not send a second payment to fix the first.
The reasons you will hear
| The reason | What it actually is |
|---|---|
| Escrow is having problems | An outage explanation attached to a request that benefits one side |
| It will be faster | True, and irrelevant. Speed is what you are being sold in exchange for everything. |
| A discount for paying direct | The most effective version, because it feels like a negotiation you won |
| We have dealt before | History is history with an account, and accounts change hands quietly |
| My account is being restricted | A reason to hurry attached to a reason to bypass, which is the method in one sentence |
The version that reaches careful people
It frequently comes from a genuine vendor account that has been taken over, which means the history you are relying on is real and belongs to somebody who is no longer there. From your side the two are indistinguishable, which is exactly why the answer has to be flat rather than considered.
How to decline
Without explanation and without deciding whether this case is different. You are declining a category rather than judging a person, which is far easier to do consistently. A genuine vendor will not be surprised, because they know what the request looks like from your side. Anybody who argues, offers a better reason or applies pressure has answered the question for you.