Ebay: Wake Up & Smell the Coffee! Protect Us From Fraudsters Now

BigRedAnt

soolin wrote: »

Recorded though is only standard mail, so whether you send your item recorded or not it still only has cover against loss or damage of up to 41p.

I would clarify that any of my items over £41 would go special delivery purely to cover me against loss en route.

Standard mail doesn't require a signature, Recorded does, which I believe makes potential scammers less likely to try and pull a fast one.

Like I said, I've never had an INR on Recorded; the first time it happens I may change my mind.

However,I would still like the option of blocking buyers with high rates of INR.

BigRedAnt

soolin wrote: »

I was quoting from your post number 73 where you were querying what chancesare meant by a £150 limit. That in turn was in response to your statement that a buyer could win a claim for iNR even if item was received if buyer says it was signed by someone else. The fact is they WOULD NOT win the case as the signature is immaterial if item was under £150..

Now I'm lost. I originally said the Recorded signature isn't a guarantee that it went to the right person, is that wrong?

Chancesare quoted my comment about Recorded stating that no signature is required under £150, with no reference to Paypal. I said that RM does require a signature on recorded, is that wrong?

Paypal and Ebay's policies on signatures is a whole different kettle of fish, but we can discuss that too if you like.

Myyrrddyn

BigRedAnt wrote: »

Standard mail doesn't require a signature, Recorded does, which I believe makes potential scammers less likely to try and pull a fast one.

Like I said, I've never had an INR on Recorded; the first time it happens I may change my mind.

However,I would still like the option of blocking buyers with high rates of INR.

Personally I think that all purchases should have as default signed for. If some of you may have noticed that ebay seem to be putting that first on invoices you send to your customers. Problem with that is you get a load of moaning people who can't operate ebay properly saying that are not paying over £5 when my advert states free postage. If ebay are to do this then the buyer should have no recourse to claim for anything other that signed for.

chancesare_2

BigRedAnt wrote: »

Now I'm lost. I originally said the Recorded signature isn't a guarantee that it went to the right person, is that wrong?

Chancesare quoted my comment about Recorded stating that no signature is required under £150, with no reference to Paypal. I said that RM does require a signature on recorded, is that wrong?

Paypal and Ebay's policies on signatures is a whole different kettle of fish, but we can discuss that too if you like.

I quoted on your comment for recorded as a signature is neither here nor there. If you send an item under £150 to Joe Smith and it is signed for by Fred Bloggs, it will not matter a dot. The buyer will not win a claim as the signature is not relevant, the relevancy is the 'delivered' status.

Recorded (as soolin has highlighted) is normal post with no more compensation that £41.

A signature is only required for Ebay/Paypal if over £150, so therefore recorded and your reference to 'they can claim someone else signed' is not relevant. The signature is not needed under this amount. If the signature is wrong or they claim it is someone else, it is not going to win them a dispute.

The fact 'recorded' gives a signature is of no help to your Ebay/Paypal dispute. The item needs to show as 'delivered' online. Recorded rarely does this. That was my point. Signature is only relevant on items over £150.

Originally Posted by BigRedAnt
Absolutely, they can claim that someone else signed. To be honest this is quite rare, and you get less INR claims if you send recorded rather than standard.

If you are sending items normal post/recorded up to £100, then you will not be covered by Royal Mail in the event of a claim. If you think recorded gives you anything more, you are mistaken. It is not a tracked service, it does not enhance compensation, it merely 'offers' a signature on delivery, which is not guaranteed and even when it does happen, it can fail to be updated online.

I only use Recorded on items that are over the compensation rate for RM, as an added bit of security. If items are over £100 they go courier.

BigRedAnt

chancesare wrote: »

Recorded (as soolin has highlighted) is normal post with no more compensation that £41.

Have I said at any point that it isn't? Other than the fact that it gets you a signature?

My point is that I believe you get less scammers with Recorded - regardless of what Paypal's policy is. And my original point was that Recorded wasn't any guarantee of not getting an INR.

To be honest though this is all just a side issue; even if you track and trace every single item you can still be scammed, or have low DSRs left with no justiifiication, etc etc

soolin

Myyrrddyn wrote: »

Personally I think that all purchases should have as default signed for. If some of you may have noticed that ebay seem to be putting that first on invoices you send to your customers. Problem with that is you get a load of moaning people who can't operate ebay properly saying that are not paying over £5 when my advert states free postage. If ebay are to do this then the buyer should have no recourse to claim for anything other that signed for.

Why do you want to be told what to do by ebay, I certainly don't. My default postage is for 2nd class, I do not offer recorded and so when my buyers get an invoice they pay exactly what it said on my auction unless they opt for 1st class (which about 2% do).

I keep my prices down and get very high p and p stars, if other sellers want to charge extra for a service that doesn't work then let them. It just makes my prices look even better.

As for people gettign what they pay for, then i am very happy that I treat my buyers with respect, it seems to work for me. I certainly would not support any site that took away a buyers legal right to a refund if a paid for item failed to arrive just because they opted for a different postage method offered by a seller.

All my items under £41 go 2nd class or parcel post depending on weight, for items over £41 the only postal option I offer is special so that I am covered against loss in the post.

Myyrrddyn

soolin wrote: »

Why do you want to be told what to do by ebay, I certainly don't. My default postage is for 2nd class, I do not offer recorded and so when my buyers get an invoice they pay exactly what it said on my auction unless they opt for 1st class (which about 2% do).

I keep my prices down and get very high p and p stars, if other sellers want to charge extra for a service that doesn't work then let them. It just makes my prices look even better.

As for people gettign what they pay for, then i am very happy that I treat my buyers with respect, it seems to work for me. I certainly would not support any site that took away a buyers legal right to a refund if a paid for item failed to arrive just because they opted for a different postage method offered by a seller.

All my items under £41 go 2nd class or parcel post depending on weight, for items over £41 the only postal option I offer is special so that I am covered against loss in the post.

I think ebay has created a major problem with sellers. If you read the ebay forums which i do a lot. There is a trend for sellers to be wanting ebay to do this. And I as one would support it.
Most of my stuff goes 2nd class and my customers are not charged for postage at all. I do give then the chance to upgrade to signed for. This they have to pay for. A lot of my customers do upgrade, but this is only accepted if there is a proof that it has been signed for. Sellers can still lose out with this method as well.
Ebay are a rule to them selves. If anyone reading anything on here would certainly see that the before mentioned statement is true.
It is only on the few occasions that they seem to listed to the sellers. It is a buyers market out there and it is the sellers who are getting the sticky end of the wicket.
I for one back this link and hope that we can get ebay to smell the coffee! they probably wouldn't wake up though, but one step at a time.

chancesare_2

BigRedAnt wrote: »

Have I said at any point that it isn't? Other than the fact that it gets you a signature?

My point is that I believe you get less scammers with Recorded - regardless of what Paypal's policy is. And my original point was that Recorded wasn't any guarantee of not getting an INR.

To be honest though this is all just a side issue; even if you track and trace every single item you can still be scammed, or have low DSRs left with no justiifiication, etc etc

I won't labour this as it is getting very boring.

You don't get less scammers with recorded. Recorded is not guaranteed and does not even online track in a lot of cases. I would like to see where you get your belief from, other than personal knowledge.

I am at a loss with the highlighed part as you seem to contradict what you are saying, unless I have completely misunderstood.

My highlighting your comment regarding you only sending items over £100 via courier was to assist you. You will not get any more compensation from RM even with recorded, a point I am not arguing you have said, but showing you don't have the correct understanding of RD and it's 'added security' as you put it.

However, scamming on Ebay is not something I think is rife in my marketplace. Most of these 'movements' for change are from people who do not take time to understand the rules. There are those who do fall foul of scammers, but that is possible in any walk of life, not just Ebay.

Mp32

way too much squabbling going on

BigRedAnt

soolin wrote: »

I certainly would not support any site that took away a buyers legal right to a refund if a paid for item failed to arrive just because they opted for a different postage method offered by a seller.

Now this I totally agree with. The onus still has to be on the seller; in the early days of Ebay the buyer didn't have enough protection, letting dodgy sellers give everyone a bad name.

However, providing sellers with protection doesn't have to compromise buyer protection in any way. Why should an honest seller lose business based on a feedback and DSR system that is open to abuse?

To be honest if a scammer rips me off for a few quid it isn't the end of the world (although it hurts start-ups much more). But why should I lose my reputation and potential future sales too?