Another money transfer protection

For me, like many Habr visitors, the Internet is not only a source of news and entertainment, but also a platform for creativity and the realization of my ideas. That is why I often come across a “customer-executive” situation where I play the first role.
Rejecting questions of specific tasks, the main problem in such a situation is a lack of trust between the parties: the customer is not sure that the contractor will fulfill the task qualitatively and in time, and the contractor will pay him for his work.

Of course there are options, but their choice is not as wide as it seems:

1. translations with patronage;
2. escrow services.

In the first case, the problem is not fundamentally solved, but gives some additional degree of confidence for the parties. Consider it in more detail.
In the case of a transfer of funds with patronage in the losing case, one of the parties is sure to remain

• time protection - money sender;
• code protection - the recipient.

In the second case, everything is much better. But we are faced with problems of a different nature:

• search for a trusted third party
• third party payment
• the difficulty of confirming the fact of execution of their obligations in full (for the contractor)

What can be done?

Asking this question, I presented a situation in which both parties to the transaction:

1. are on an equal footing;
2. do not receive motivation and opportunities for fraud;
3. Do not spend money on security payments.

After a long night of brainstorming, I found a solution - controversial, but meeting the above criteria. And called it "Fair Deal" or "Non-Refundable Payment"

The essence of the decision

The customer transfers the payment to the contractor not directly, but using a third party. When translating, it indicates:

• the time during which the translation is valid;
• security code, which guarantees him the safety of his funds from getting the performer ahead of time.

But what is the warranty performer?

The fact that at the end of the payment validity period, provided that the executor does not enter the code, the customer does not receive his payment back. Thus, the guarantee of the contractor is the absolute certainty that the customer will not deceive and will not return their money.
A bit risky and unusual? I agree. But in this case, both sides have the motivation for a successful resolution of the issue.

Where will the money go if both participants don’t get it?

When using traditional payment systems, the answer would be the owner of this system. That is not an absolutely fair decision and gives rise to abuse by the owner of the payment system or escrow service.
To solve this dilemma, I turned to the most popular decentralized payment system (I apologize for this definition) - the bitcoin network.
Its obvious advantage for my task is the fact that it does not have a specific owner and allows you to set an arbitrary commission when transferring.
Thus, in the event of a negative development of events, when both participants do not receive money, the bitcoin network receives them in the form of a commission.
')

And what will happen in force majeure situations?

In the course of activity, both the contractor and the customer may be faced with valid reasons for default. And this is not a reason to lose money. In this case, when both participants agree that the transaction did not take place for a good reason, the executor enters the payment unlock code that sends the money back to the customer.
For clarity and discussion, I have collected a small example of how this can be implemented in practice.
I would be happy to discuss with you the pitfalls and shortcomings of my method.