It may be possible to reclaim money from paypal!

cyril82

cyberbob wrote: »

A Dictionary definition would not get you very far in court. What you need is the legal definition. Which is why ebay are specify they are auction style so that they don't have follow the rules of auctions.

You may think its an auction but that does not make it correct in english law. You may be morally correct that it is an auction but legally it is not, which is the bit that matters.

By repeating this in numerous different threads does not make your argument correct. It was interesting the first time but is now getting a little dull

you know what i find dull? people repeatedly posting in threads to say "your wrong because i said so, i'm not going to support my claim but i'm right so your wrong, now shut up"

It's so lame and it's funny you and others telling me that the supporting literature from the oft (who regulate online sales and distance selling) the dictionary, and Ebay themselves "won't stand up in court".

How far do you expect you'd get with your " i don't have any evidence, i'm just right" argument, :rotfl:

This thread really isn't about "what would stand up in court" as the financial ombudsman does not necessarily make a decision based on legal arguments as they are not a court, they make a decision on what they feel is fair and reasonable and i can say from experience you are far more likely to get a complaint upheld by the financial ombudsman if your argument relates to unfair treatment than just a legal technicality as in such cases the ombudsman would advise you to take the legal route via the courts.

While the point i made does not relate directly to what is "legal" but more what is "fair and reasonable" using your terms and conditions to remove a consumers/users right to exercise their legal rights may well be judged to be "unfair" and if you lose out as a result the ombudsman may decide that you should be recompensed.

It's worth noting that paypal appear not to stand by their policy quite so vehemently as you and some users of this forum as when the Daily mail presented a file of cases to paypal where paypal had found against the seller and refused to reconsider they suddenly did a U-turn on no less than 50% of those "Closed" cases.

Why do that if they felt they were in the right? and surely if those people could get their cases reconsidered others may be able to also, sure they might not be able to get the daily mail to help but in general the ombudsman has more clout than a newspaper which is why people in this situation should probably take that route.

StaffsSW

cyril82

Welcome steve i've been expecting you... :rolleyes:

dontdoit_2

cyril82 wrote: »

i can say from experience you are far more likely to get a complaint upheld by the financial ombudsman

Well, go and complain to the FSO then. Just stop posting nonsense on here, complain to the FSO and come back and let us know how it went.

cyril82 wrote: »

if ebay say their sales are auctions Ebay are wrong

Again, posting INCORRECT information does not male you correct. You have still failed to point out where ebay say they are an auctioneer. Its BASIC stuff this that you are failing to grasp. EBAY HAVE NEVER STATED THEY ARE AN AUCTIONEER, AN AUCTION HOUSE OR EVEN AN AUCTION - in the legal sense of the word auction. They even firmly deny they are in the T&Cs.

cyril82 wrote: »

if the oft say those sales are auctione the oft are wrong

Again, you have failed to point out where OFT have said ebay are an auctioneer. Go on, point it out. I want to see a phrase along the lines of "ebay are an auctioneer according to us", not a general statement about auctions being different to online auctions - which is what you posted.

"auctions, including internet auctions" Can't see the words ebay there, can you, just a phrase that states auctions are held in a different light to internet 'auctions'

cyril82 wrote: »

if i say they are auctions i am wrong.

Yes, you are wrong. Everything you have said HAS been disproved. Its just you are so wrapped in in yourself you cannot see it.

cyril82 wrote: »

Seems the only person who is never wrong is you, .

Glad we agree somewhere.

cyril82 wrote: »

And adding "style" to something does not change it's definition, if i started selling illegal fire arms but told the police they were illegal "style" fire arms would i be ok,.

That just proves you do NOT understand the basics. This stuff is basic, and not complicated. EBAY are NOT an auctioneer. Nowhere has ebay even suggested they are an auctioneer. If you want to beleive they are, thats your problem, and up to YOU to convince the FSO or a Judge.

So convince them, as you have failed to convince me.

As previously stated, (And ignored by you as it shreds your arguement)

English dictionary's definition of an auction - I provided a legal definition (or at least one lawyers definition) which tears yours to bits

OFT literature that says online auctions are classed as auctions - NOPE, can't see them specifically mentioning ebay there, all they mention is "auctions, including internet auctions" so even they admit that there is a difference between auctions and internet auctions

and ebay's own website content where ebay themselves state that their sales are auctions - I provided enough ebay links (even T&Cs) that say they are NOT an auction, or care to point out where they say they are an auction (action style is a totally different meaning by the way)


As a challenge, write to the FSO tomorrow and make a complaint, and write to ebay and ask them if they are an auctioneer. Then come back here and let us know how you got on. Other than that stop posting factually incorrect information that has been shown to you to be so.

cyril82

dontdoit wrote: »

Well, go and complain to the FSO then. Just stop posting nonsense on here, complain to the FSO and come back and let us know how it went.



Again, posting INCORRECT information does not male you correct. You have still failed to point out where ebay say they are an auctioneer. Its BASIC stuff this that you are failing to grasp.



Again, you have failed to point out where OFT have said ebay are an auctioneer. Go on, point it out. I want to see a phrase along the lines of "ebay are an auctioneer according to us", not a general statement about auctions being different to online auctions - which is what you posted.

"auctions, including internet auctions" Can't see the words ebay there, can you, just a phrase that states auctions are held in a different light to internet 'auctions'



Yes, you are wrong. Everything you have said HAS been disproved. Its just you are so wrapped in in yourself you cannot see it.




Glad we agree somewhere.



That just proves you do NOT understand the basics. This stuff is basic, and not complicated. EBAY are NOT an auctioneer. Nowhere has ebay even suggested they are an auctioneer. If you want to beleive they are, thats your problem, and up to YOU to convince the FSO or a Judge.

So convince them, as you have failed to convince me.

As a challenge, write to the FSO tomorrow and make a complaint, and write to ebay and ask them if they are an auctioneer. Then come back here and let us know how you got on. Other than that stop posting factually incorrect information that has been shown to you to be so.

I'm not going to pretend i read all that because i didn't, but i am just going to point some things out to you, it isn't me missing the basics i'm afraid.

Firstly, i have no current cases outstanding that require adjudication so i won't be referring my case to the ombudsman, i posted this thread in light of the fact that a lot of people come to these boards looking for help when ebay/paypal either take money from their account by force or send debt collectors after them, sending debt collectors after people where they have no legal financial obligation to you is wrong, no matter if you are an individual or a multi billion pound company.

This demand you keep making that i show evidence that ebay are an "auctioneer" is absurd, ebay don't need to be the auctioneer for sale by bidding on their site to be classed as auctions, internet auctions don't need an traditional auctioneer.

Asking for me to provide litrature from the OFT that states specifically that "ebay sales are auctions or ebay are auctioneers" is also absurd, regulators post advice in general terms they do not comment on individual traders, if they did they would have to list every single one of ebay's millions of registered sellers, i.e. the distance selling regulations apply to joe blogs from Abroath, billy bob of essex, peter pan from liverpool they also apply to grattan catalougue, tesco online, asda online........ imagine having to reference every trading business in order for legislation to apply. :rolleyes:


i would suggest if ebay wanted to claim that sales on their site were not auctions it is they who would need to prove that they are not auctions not the buyer having to prove they were. So far ebay or paypal have never gone to court to prove that sale by bidding does not amount to an auction on their site so there is no English legal case law that supports this claim you make.

In any case the ombudsman would decide if he thought that the sale of goods by bidding on the ebay website count as auctions, we can disagree all day long but my opinion or yours don't really matter, only the ombudsman's opinion would matter.

The point of this thread was to highlight to sellers coming here looking for advice that contrary to popular belief that no one is regulating paypal here in the UK and any complaints would need to be raised via Luxembourg authorities they can in fact complain via the ombudsman if they have lost money as a result of unfair treatment particularly in cases such as the ones discussed in the daily mail article.

None of the people who ended up getting their money back from paypal in the daily mail article had to go to court and prove that oft regulations applied to ebay or that ebay was an "auctioneer" or that sale by bidding on the ebay website is an auction.

It is therefore misleading to say that anyone wishing to pursue ebay in similar cases would need to go to court and prove these things, the chances are the threat of involving the ombudsman would result in their money being returned if not they can go to the ombudsman and only if that failed would they need to even consider going to the small claims court, but as i've said there are no such cases that have gone to court so there is no legal case law to support anything you say.

My point about going to the ombudsman does not place any burden of legal proof on the complainant that's the beauty of it, a decision will be made on whether or not the seller should have been made to refund/reimburse paypal based on what is "fair and reasonable" not what is legal necessarily.

So thankfully, i or anyone wishing to complain to the ombudsman and seek adjudication will not need to pass your impossible test of providing specific proof that ebay are an auctioneer, ebay sales are auctions, providing legal case law before making a complaint, none of this is necessary.

If the ombudsman decides the sales are auctions that's all that matters, and there is no risk or cost involved in asking them to decide.

dontdoit_2

As a challenge, write to the FSO tomorrow and make a complaint, and write to ebay and ask them if they are an auctioneer. Then come back here and let us know how you got on. Other than that stop posting factually incorrect information that has been shown to you to be so.

StaffsSW

dontdoit wrote: »

As a challenge, write to the FSO tomorrow and make a complaint, and write to ebay and ask them if they are an auctioneer. Then come back here and let us know how you got on. Other than that stop posting factually incorrect information that has been shown to you to be so.

You are fighting a losing battle here. Cyril has a "history" of posting like this - he'd rather shout and bluster online than have do anything in the real world. You can not soar with eagles when you are surrounded by turkeys.

You may find this link useful - http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/profile.html?do=addlist&userlist=ignore&u=670459

cyril82

dontdoit wrote: »

As a challenge, write to the FSO tomorrow and make a complaint, and write to ebay and ask them if they are an auctioneer. Then come back here and let us know how you got on. Other than that stop posting factually incorrect information that has been shown to you to be so.

Auction and auctioneer my friend are two different things. A sale can be an auction without an auctioneer if the bidding process is computerised.

Nothing i posted has been proven to be incorrect the only case you have presented against my suggestion that people can ask the ombudsman to decide if they should get their money back in cases where they have lost both their money and their goods is your own opinion and your own interpretation of ebay policy wording.

Here is a challenge for you, go away and come back with a Englsh legal case where ebay have gone to court to prove that sales are not auctions on their sites even if they are by bidding, not that ebay were not the auctioneer that is irrelevant but that the actual sale by bidding on the ebay platform does not constitute an auction for the purpose of the implementation of distance selling regulations and the relevant exceptions, surely you can do that?

cyril82

stevew8975 wrote: »

You are fighting a losing battle here. Cyril has a "history" of posting like this - he'd rather shout and bluster online than have do anything in the real world. You can not soar with eagles when you are surrounded by turkeys.

You may find this link useful - http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/profile.html?do=addlist&userlist=ignore&u=670459

Steve can i suggest that if me posting links and information to where people can go if they have lost money and goods through ebay and paypal's unfair refunds policy offends you so deeply you use that link yourself rather than just try to get others to use it?

dontdoit_2

I do realise that. Its just a bit of fun tearing peoples arguments to shreads, especially ones that have taken the person a couple of seconds of 'thought' to construct, but which they then cannot see as flawed.

I just wanted this to go to court so I could attend and have a laugh (along with everyone else in the building) when he produces his proof as a copy of the daily mail, and a misinderstood dictionary definition.

Little things like that amuse me.

As a challenge, write to the FSO tomorrow and make a complaint, and write to ebay and ask them if they are an auctioneer. Then come back here and let us know how you got on. Other than that stop posting factually incorrect information that has been shown to you to be so.