I want to neg someone for negging me

thepedestrian

Yes its as bad as it sounds

- they negged me for a loose thread on an item and a faint stain - my partner and I have examined the returned article with a magnifiying glass ( no really ! ) - and we can almost barely see it ( on the back )
my mistake was in listing as new - when I should have listed used
be warned - if in any doubt - list used!

I would dearly love for this buyer to list something that I would buy and crucify him for it - but I know its just his buying account and they are never going to sell on it

rant over - have you ever felt like that though even though 2 wrongs dont .....yada yada

I sent it free and returned it to me free , full refund and still the neg




......Ebay - you gotta love it ! :rotfl:

medic1978

If it wasn't new shouldn't have been listed as new.

Shame you got neg, despite offering full refund though (did it include return postage?).
There are plenty of idiots out there- don't become one of them. Get over it and move on...

thepedestrian

Yey full refund and free postage out and paid for it to come back - yep youre right though ,just got to suck it up

natalieho

I agree if you could see a stain i would also have listed this in the desc no matter how faint it was and also used, but you rectified it all so they shouldnt have left neg

Crowqueen

natalieho wrote: »

I agree if you could see a stain i would also have listed this in the desc no matter how faint it was and also used, but you rectified it all so they shouldnt have left neg

A neg is their opinion of the transaction.

If I had received a stained garment, I would expect it to be sorted out. I might not neg, but I certainly wouldn't bend over backwards to give the seller glowing feedback, much less expect them to neg me for something that was their responsibility all along.

macfly

Was it new or was it used? I've had wholesale buys which had stains from the warehouse on some items, so they were new but mucky. If that's the case and it was so small you didn't notice, then it is unfair. But if it was used, it's fair.

tryingtogetsolvent

retalitory negging is exactly the reason Ebay removed the negative option from sellers

thepedestrian

it was the former - actually unworn ( having a problem with Ebay`s item condition`s as they dont cover as you say something that is unused but not new - could have been stored for sometime so is not new but is unused )

just could not believe they sited a loose thread ( which was just an extra piece of thread that you sometimes get around a new items label )

we really had to look for a long time to find the mark on the back ( with magnifying glass ) and are still not 100% sure that was what they meant

- I get the feeling looking at the bid stats that they got into a bidding war with another bidder and payed way to much just to win - then regretted it later and jumped on the tinyiest thing to return it - which is understandable in away but then why the Neg ?

lesson learnt - I shall either have to examine everything with an electron microscope before sending it or just classify everything as being used

( luckily I do not have any Durex products to shift ! ) :rotfl:

thepedestrian

tryingtogetsolvent wrote: »

retalitory negging is exactly the reason Ebay removed the negative option from sellers

yeah thanks for that insight ....STOP THE PRESS

Micheal Jackson is dead

macfly

It wouldn't have been retaliatory in this case. Just a true reflection of the seller's experience.

gavjbrown

At the end of the day you listed a used/marked item of clothing as new. As we don't know the full details its hard to know if the neg was deserved.