Urgent help needed with ebay

maggiecon

So i tried the diplomatic approach advising the seller that the ring wasnt as described, and her response was

"Other interested buyers contacted me during the auction and made enquiries about the ring, before they bid. YOU DID NOT CONTACT ME TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS. Now, because the stone is not as big as you would have liked, you want a refund. You should have asked me this before the auction ended"


Surely it is not my responsibilty to ask her to describe the ring accurately she should have done this in her description.
What do I do next? how do I raise a SNAD and have i any chance of getting my money back as she made me pay through bank transfer

Crowqueen

No, not really - some people will try and claim it is, but it's not. A seller is the one with more power in their hands to describe something accurately or not and if all the information you would normally require was in the listing, then why rely on you to ask whether it was actually as listed?

The only way you have of getting that back would be legal action, as SNADs can only usually be raised if you used Paypal.

shellsuit

Ahh I've just seen the auction, and I'm afraid I can see where you would have gathered the diamond would be larger than on the pic.

Doesn't look like the seller has done anything wrong to be honest as if you were unsure you could have asked for a close up of the ring/diamond.

It actually is as described, it's just the pic which is naff as it's not a close up.

Maybe sell it on yourself?

ETA, You should have insisted on paying by Paypal as that is a payment option on the sellers listing as it is on all sellers listings. Sorry that the seller coerced you into paying with a transfer

jasmineswhiskers

Crowqueen wrote: »

@Jasmine - failure to mention is the same thing as not describing an item properly. Under SOGA even items bought from private sellers must be as described so a seller needs to convince a judge that the item was adequately described.

So the seller of a diamond ring does not mention the size of the ring, carat of diamond, clarity and cut. These are the important factors when buying a diamond ring. To dive in headfirst without asking these questions is completely foolhardy. I don't believe it is the same as not describing an item properly. If the seller said this a 1ct flawless white diamond ring then yes this is blatantly wrong. I haven't seen the item page but if it was just described as a 'diamond ring' then it is correct as that's what it is. What/where is the definition of 'adequately described'?
I bought a blouse last week, the buttons measure 7mm diameter where I was expecting them the measure 11mm...

Crowqueen

jasmineswhiskers wrote: »

So the seller of a diamond ring does not mention the size of the ring, carat of diamond, clarity and cut. These are the important factors when buying a diamond ring. To dive in headfirst without asking these questions is completely foolhardy. I don't believe it is the same as not describing an item properly. If the seller said this a 1ct flawless white diamond ring then yes this is blatantly wrong. I haven't seen the item page but if it was just described as a 'diamond ring' then it is correct as that's what it is. What/where is the definition of 'adequately described'?
I bought a blouse last week, the buttons measure 7mm diameter where I was expecting them the measure 11mm...

You know my take on this issue before. It's the seller's listing, therefore the seller's responsibility. THE LAW IS SET UP TO PROTECT BUYERS FROM PEOPLE LIKE THIS. It is not set up to protect people who take advantage of their customers' potential gullibility, otherwise you would get everyone doing this and there would be no legal recourse for people who have genuinely been scammed. Regardless about what you or I think about the buyer's foolishness in buying something from someone like this, nevertheless, people put their trust in these kind of things every day. It is not fair nor right to put the onus on the customer to ask questions when the item canot be seen or examined and there is the potential that a dishonest seller could over-describe an item without the buyer having some sort of recourse. That is the whole reason why laws such as the Distance Selling Regulations exist in the first place and if the buyer has a case under these, it renders any issue of description moot anyway. She will have to take it to court to get recompense or to assert the rights she has, but for £200 she should do.

Plus the OP has been basically scammed by being asked for bank transfer rather than paying by Paypal, so she does not have normal recourse to the dispute system.

If the seller did not mention these details and made it out to be better than it actually was, then the ad was misleading and would be seen as such in a small claim.

You CANNOT foist responsibilities for listing an item properly onto the buyer. Not in any practical, legal sense, particularly when the buyer may have additional rights under the DSRs.

You may feel that way in a practical sense, and I agree I probably wouldn't bother with a listing without clear mention of things like this, but sellers have the responsibility to list items correctly, not do this and not expect to be taken to task on it.

I really get sick of people trying to intimidate buyers who have been victims of scams - and pressuring someone without all the facts at their disposal into not paying with Paypal on eBay is as good as a scam - into not taking action because they should have seen it coming. People who want to take advantage will always find a way to do so - the right thing is to take action against these people so they don't do it again.

shellsuit

Crowqueen wrote: »

You know my take on this issue before. It's the seller's listing, therefore the seller's responsibility. THE LAW IS SET UP TO PROTECT BUYERS FROM PEOPLE LIKE THIS. It is not set up to protect people who take advantage of their customers' potential gullibility, otherwise you would get everyone doing this and there would be no legal recourse for people who have genuinely been scammed.

Plus the OP has been basically scammed by being asked for bank transfer rather than paying by Paypal, so she does not have normal recourse to the dispute system.

If the seller did not mention these details and made it out to be better than it actually was, then the ad was misleading and would be seen as such in a small claim.

You CANNOT foist responsibilities for listing an item properly onto the buyer. Not in any practical, legal sense.

You may feel that way in a practical sense, and I agree I probably wouldn't bother with a listing without clear mention of things like this, but sellers have the responsibility to list items correctly, not do this and not expect to be taken to task on it.

But the seller didn't.

The only thing the seller has done wrong is to refuse payment by Paypal.

If i buy a skirt on eBay and it says it is a size 12 and to me it looks fine on the pic, but when I receive it, it's too small, that is my fault for not asking for the measurements.

Same thing has happened here, the OP has seen a pic of the ring and thought the whole top part was the diamond, when it wasn't, it was the diamond and the mount.

That's what the 'ask seller a question' function is for.

freddysmith

Having looked at the auction in question, I notice you are a very inexperienced Ebayer and may have been over excited in the bidding process.
There simply is not enough detail in the listing or photo. If the diamond was as large as it appears in the photo the price would have been much more as other people bidding would have asked questions.
This might end up being a lesson in Ebay buying and always ask questions and be prepared to walk away.
I do not think the seller is at fault, they did add info to corrected the listing to show the correct ring size.
Not using Paypal also has shown inexperience in Ebay best practices.
I see little chance in a refund but I do wish you the best in whatever course you take.

chancesare_2

OP, regardless of where the fault lies and I am not taking sides either way, Ebay do now allow buyers to open a resolution process for an item not necessarily paid for by Paypal. Go to the resolution section and open up a claim (if you feel it is SNAD). In some circumstances Ebay have sent vouchers or given a credit when a case cannot be resolved. Likewise, they have the power to reclaim monies paid via the sellers registered payment method if found in the buyers favour.

Myyrrddyn

maggiecon wrote: »

Hi guys need some help, my fiance bought me an engagement ring on ebay. We cant afford a ring bu everyone keeps asking me to see my e ring so we bought a cheap one as we are sick of explaining to people we didnt have one.

Anyway I paid nearly £200 for a ring advertised as platinum and diamond and the picture should a big diamond on the ring, but when we received the ring the bit that looked like a diamond is actually metal and you cant even see the diamond! I dont even think it is I diamond.

The seller didnt have a return policy, what are my rights and would should my next step be.

Do I say that the picture was misleading?

Please help as £200 is a lot of money for a ring that I cant even call an engagement ring as there is no diamond visible on it.

I have about 5 customers who are waiting on items posted on the 2nd god knows what is happening

freddysmith

Myyrrddyn wrote: »

I have about 5 customers who are waiting on items posted on the 2nd god knows what is happening

Please pay attention