Someone's Going To Get Stung

codger

Not sticking up for fraudsters at all. Commonsense, yes.

The essence of a transaction is the content of a listing. You do not buy a title or a subheading or a category. You buy an item.

If it's a fraud, a word all too glibly chucked around on this thread, then prove it -- by showing that what the listing's content actually said was not what a bidder was actually buying.

* Love the qualification in your post, frivolous. That's exactly what eBay always does: decide if, in its opinion, there is strong enough evidence to warrant pulling a listing. It's why listings involving shilling, miscategorisation and downright fraud not only don't get pulled, but appear day in and day out. . . after being reported.

I certainly feel sorry for those who bought what they bid for. But then, that's what they bid for. . .

Amazombie

codger wrote:

The essence of a transaction is the content of a listing. You do not buy a title or a subheading or a category. You buy an item.
.

Ah ok, I see now it was just an accident that the seller somehow forgot to mention in the listing title that it was just an image he was selling and also by pure co-incidence he also just happened to list it under consoles.

I accept I am wrong and admit defeat :rotfl:

codger

Amazombie wrote:

I accept I am wrong and admit defeat :rotfl:

Knew you'd see sense. Well done! :beer:

Moneyfornothing_2

cammo12 wrote:

anyone that thinks otherwise needs an education! :mad: :mad: :mad:

:rolleyes: What a great way to lose any credibility that your post 'might' of contained.

codger

Moneyfornothing wrote:

:rolleyes: What a great way to lose any credibility that your post 'might' of contained.

Ah, but, three people did find that post very useful.

Obviously the lack of education evident on this thread is to be lamented.


:rotfl:

shelly

cammo12 wrote:

There is no argument in support of the listing and anyone that thinks otherwise needs an education! :mad: :mad: :mad:

Who died and made your opinion law?? Because you think its wrong so should everyone else??

Just because we don't all agree on this subject doesn't make any one persons view right or wrong.



I think though that the camp is split so maybe this thread should die a quiet death

greeneye

I think the main point in this thread (given that none of us would have fallen for it) is does the seller get way with it?
Will Paypal honour dispute claims, freeze sellers funds and refund buyers?
Because if they don't Paypal are likely to loose out on the wrong end of CC chargebacks.
Hence I doubt this works to well.
All in all like I said earlier in the thread I think this is a teenagers fraud not a proper well planned con and not much cash will actually reach the seller.

pennylane99

greeneye wrote:

I think the main point in this thread (given that none of us would have fallen for it) is does the seller get way with it?
Will Paypal honour dispute claims, freeze sellers funds and refund buyers?
Because if they don't Paypal are likely to loose out on the wrong end of CC chargebacks.
Hence I doubt this works to well.
All in all like I said earlier in the thread I think this is a teenagers fraud not a proper well planned con and not much cash will actually reach the seller.

there was no Paypal buyer protection on the listing....

greeneye

pennylane99 wrote:

there was no Paypal buyer protection on the listing....

hey penny - No buyer protection doesn't stop credit card chargebacks - Buyer protection only means paypal will honour disputes themselves so you don't have to resort to a chargeback.
Paypal get burdened with the CC chargebacks themselves.
Hence me being dubious of Paypal actually letting the seller getting any funds after a dispute or two has been opened - I really don't think this is a sucessful fraud we keep discussing these all the time on this board but actually I don't think the seller is ever getting much cash out of them.

codger

shelly wrote:

I think though that the camp is split so maybe this thread should die a quiet death

Agreed :beer: