Letter from the table: What do we do when the letters go unanswered?

To the Platform Council

My question for the chair is simple: what is our next move if the letters are delivered and nothing comes back?

I support the Platform Fairness Standard. I also think we should be honest about what a standard can and cannot do on its own. A clear rule gives small businesses a way to say what fair treatment looks like. It does not, by itself, make a platform explain a decision or release money.

On 31 July, a large marketplace put my account under review. On 3 August, I could no longer use the account normally. A payout of ₦1,840,000, which I had expected on 7 August, did not arrive. I was told there was a review, but I was not given a specific reason I could answer. I sent the documents requested through the appeal process and asked what part of my account or activity needed attention. I received another general response. I could not get a person to tell me what evidence would resolve the matter, or when the funds would be released.

That sum was not an abstract balance on a screen. It was money I had set aside for ordinary business commitments. I had to delay two payments and explain to people who were waiting why I could not give them a reliable date. I do not want to describe my business or what it does. The point is that the account was part of how I received money, and the hold put the next steps of my work in somebody else’s hands.

I tried to separate the problem into parts. I contacted my bank to find out whether a transfer had been initiated. A bank can help trace a payment instruction; it cannot review a marketplace’s account decision. I also looked

at the proper local route. The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission is established under Nigeria’s Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018, but my difficulty was not a straightforward purchase complaint: I was a business user trying to understand a restriction and a delayed payout. The Central Bank of Nigeria has a role in the banking and payment system, not in deciding whether a marketplace should suspend a seller’s account. Knowing which institution does what matters. It also left me with no quick route to a specific answer.

This is why the Standard’s requests are practical, not ceremonial. Before a suspension or payout hold, the user should receive written notice and a specific reason. There should be a real human review, and a payout hold should have a time limit. The same protections should apply wherever the platform operates. If I had received a reason I could address, I could have sent relevant evidence rather than guessing. If a person had reviewed it, I could have explained the issue once instead of repeating myself through a form. If the hold had a deadline, I could have planned around a date rather than an indefinite uncertainty.

The Assembly adopted the Standard on 13 August. On 20 August, it sent letters to seven CEOs asking them to adopt it; those letters were delivered later that month. As of today, there are no replies on record. I understand why the Council has proposed a second wave of seats, including mid-sized platforms, with letters scheduled for November. I support that approach. The businesses using these services are not all gathered around the largest platforms, and the same basic protections should not depend on a company’s size.

But I would like the Council to tell us how it will measure what happens after delivery. Will a seat remain simply “Letter sent” or “Delivered” until a CEO replies? Will the public be able to see whether a company has accepted the Standard, declined it, or proposed another process? Will the Council set a clear period for a response and then publish the status, without pretending that silence means agreement? A visible record would

make the seat-tracking process useful to members and fair to the companies being asked to act.

I would also ask the chair to keep the next step specific. The request is not that a CEO personally decide every seller appeal. It is that the company commit to a process: notice with a reason, review by a person, and a time limit for payout holds. If a company replies that it already does these things, the Council can ask how a business user can find that process and use it. If a company says it will consider the Standard, the Council can record what it has agreed to consider and by when. If there is no reply, the Council can say so plainly and continue its work with members, relevant public institutions, and the next group of platforms.

I am not asking for a promise that every account decision will go my way. A platform may have a sound reason to act. I am asking for a way to understand that reason, answer it, and know how long my money can remain held. That is a modest standard for a business relationship that can affect whether a small business meets its obligations.