Buyer wanting to cancel...

soolin

Crowqueen wrote: »

On the contrary, there is the option of a mutual cancellation which fulfils this need.

It does not as it requires buyer to confirm the process and in most cases the buyer has shown themselves unable to understand how to buy or use ebay by buying something they don't want in the first place. If I can't trust a buyer to buy what they actually want i will not trust them to complete a mutual.

mobile48

George666 wrote: »

I am sure ebay has very well paid and trained solicitors who write up these agreements and know a lot more about consumer law than anyone who posts on forums myself included, and that means a buyer cannot do anything about geting a non payment strike put on their account either by a business or private seller I for one would not like to argue with ebays legal team and accept that as a buyer if I do not pay a strike will be put on my account as I agreed to when I opened my ebay account.

Which is why there is room in the agreement for buyers not to pay.

Crowqueen

George - if you don't know anything about consumer law, and you are a business seller, I would suggest you read up on it very quickly as it might affect how you sell things.

I know where to find and read the Distance Selling Regulations, which are the regs that give buyers a statutory cooling off period on business seller BINs.

They're here if you need them: http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/general/oft698.pdf

Not all big businesses adhere to them properly (including eBay), but it's not up to eBay to do your own work for you and it's not as if non-compliance makes them void when someone buys from your eBay listings.

George666

mobile48 wrote: »

Which is why there is room in the agreement for buyers not to pay.

My point exactly this means a buyer is not being forced into paying so no laws have been broken but a strike is perfectly legal.

soolin

George666 wrote: »

My point exactly this means a buyer is not being forced into paying so no laws have been broken but a strike is perfectly legal.

That is sort of my viewpoint as well.

I don't think I am breaking any law by issuing a strike and getting my fees back, in fact I don't think the DS regulations mention 'strikes' at all. I am merely reclaiming my seller fees.

I am not removing any buyer rights nor am I costing them anything and if they only do it once then they suffer no harm at all and no rights have been infringed. Obviously if they are serial non payers then many sellers will have them blocked from bidding, and again I see nothing illegal in setting preferences to who can buy and who can not.

I think the legal issue here is a bit of a red herring.

George666

Crowqueen wrote: »

George - if you don't know anything about consumer law, and you are a business seller, I would suggest you read up on it very quickly as it might affect how you sell things.

I know where to find and read the Distance Selling Regulations, which are the regs that give buyers a statutory cooling off period on business seller BINs.

If you really think you know more than ebays legal team then you should really apply for a job with them a non payment strike is not a legal measure and only means anything within ebays system and means nothing at all elsewhere and we all agree to this when we open an ebay account so therefore it is perfectly legal.
An action that has no value at all anywhere but within a system run by a third party and that you wish to use and have read and agreed to the terms and conditions of is always a legal action.
The reason this action bears no significance anywhere else other than within the confines of that system and in no way forces the user to do anything they don't want to do.
That is the legal stance here and that is why item strikes are a legal tool sellers business or private can use within ebays system legally.

mobile48

My initial view (and I may change it) for discussion is Ebay has little at stake in the legality of this area.

The agreement is very clear sellers cannot make false non-payment claims and I assume this protects ebay by making the seller fully responsible.

In the same way a seller is responsible that their listing is legal I assume the seller is also responsible for ensuing any non-payment claims are legal.

As ebay are not part of the transaction it may not be a good idea to relay on them in this area.

terra_ferma

OP
I'm one of those who would prefer a mutual cancellation. In my opinion anything bought under duress would simply find its way back to you, probably with a dispute, bad fb and low stars.

I've had people cancelling because the could not pay (technical problems etc ) and I've always agreed to a mutual cancellation, which has gone fine. Tempted to tick the other option, but I think it would give me more grief.

George666

terra_ferma wrote: »

OP
I'm one of those who would prefer a mutual cancellation. In my opinion anything bought under duress would simply find its way back to you, probably with a dispute, bad fb and low stars.

Hi be aware that buyers that try this trick now are removed from ebay under the new seller feedback protection rules along with any feedback or DSRs they may have left for the seller.
And as ebay is now employing new state of the art tracking methods this is a lifetime ban that means life opening a new account will not fool them.

George666

mobile48 wrote: »

My initial view (and I may change it) for discussion is Ebay has little at stake in the legality of this area.

The agreement is very clear sellers cannot make false non-payment claims and I assume this protects ebay by making the seller fully responsible.

In the same way a seller is responsible that their listing is legal I assume the seller is also responsible for ensuing any non-payment claims are legal.

As ebay are not part of the transaction it may not be a good idea to relay on them in this area.

You have the idea in essence as ebay really are not getting involved but just not grasped it quite right.
There really is no legal question about this at all as you have stated yourself from your own selling experiance there is no way a buyer can be forced to pay for something they have bid on.
In fact it is quite easy for them just to ignore the whole thing until it goes away ebay is not going to take them to court or really get involved that much with the issue and after a few emails the buyer will hear no more about the matter.
As a non payment item strike bears no weight and means nothing at all outside of ebays system and as we all know the buyer is not forced to pay for anything they bid on when using ebay then there is no legal question at all.
This is the same as the question in reverse when a seller decides they do not want to sell an item after all and refunds the buyer as ebay does not force the seller to sell and as feedback means nothing outside of ebays system again no laws have been broken as long as the buyer has been refunded of course.
You can see here how apart from a few messages and statistics that mean nothing at all in the real world ebay are not getting involved at all and as what is happenning on the buyer or sellers account is meaningless in the real world so no laws are being broken.
Now I don't want to confuse anyone but when you add into the equation that none of us actually own our ebay accounts we are just being given the use of them by ebay, then as ebay own all ebay accounts then they can do whatever they like to them legally.
So you can easily see how ebay is fully covered when dealing with issues like this on buyer or seller accounts.