Have you been treated unfairly by Ebay or Paypal?

RFW

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

[/COLOR]

So the profits of an American company are far more important than the rights of UK consumers?

So much for money saving...

The main problem with this thread is who is considered a consumer, it is very rare now that a buyer is ever on the wrong end of a Paypal/Ebay decision, that's the consumer they are protecting.

A belief that a seller can be considered a consumer and worthy of an OFT investigation is in my opinion an erroneous one.

Brooker_Dave

RFW wrote: »

A belief that a seller can be considered a consumer and worthy of an OFT investigation is in my opinion an erroneous one.

Everyday people using Ebay to advertise their goods are clearly consumers.

RFW

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

Everyday people using Ebay to advertise their goods are clearly consumers.

They clearly aren't, whilst they 'consume' a service and they may not be a business, they can't be the consumer if they are selling something, all the consumer rights are with the person buying, there isn't a way to 100% protect the seller, there is a way to protect the buyer. The seller should be aware that they have to protect themselves.

If an 'everyday' person was advertising a second hand TV, that they said was working and had been checked, that was so faulty it burnt the buyer's house down, should that seller have any consumer rights? Should they have the right to be protected by Ebay, if they simply said it wasn't their fault. Would you want Paypal to ensure that that seller kept all the money from the sale of the item? Would you want that seller protected so that they could continue selling? Would you want them to keep their Ebay account, or that they could simply open a new account and sell on that one?

It may be a worse case scenario, but Paypal/Ebay have to protect the consumer from the possibility of worse case scenarios, they may do it occasionally with heavy handed tactics but I doubt the OFT would care as long as they were doing it for the rights of the consumer.

Crowqueen

Perhaps instead of bickering about it those who still want to assert their rights could take it up with the OFT themselves and set the record straight. Going round in circles about who is in the right here is not a productive use of anyone's time.

If you have a case and eBay and Paypal have a case to answer, the OFT should be able to pursue it for you. I think it's time to put your money where your mouth is - if you are so certain you are right, then put the theory to the test instead of mouthing off on a forum. If you are looking to build a campaign, then there are probably pressure groups/solicitors/ombudsmen out there more than happy to take up your cause.

If you all amount to is whinging on a forum, though, you will never get what you want - after all, we're all brainwashed eBay employees here, so I don't think you will achieve much.

nothingventured

RFW even though I've shown you the actual law, you're still basing your views on how you think things should be rather than how they actually are.

If you did as I asked in my original post and actually did some research, you'd find that the seller's rights are not at the expense of the buyer as you seem to think and that what I propose would help not only buyers and sellers but would actually make ebay a better and therefore more profitable marketplace for the site itself.

Crowqueen you're right that we are going round in circles but that's only because people don't read posts properly. The whole point of the OP was to see if anyone knew of any reason why the regulations quoted did not cover non-business sellers and if the regulations apply to those sellers to identify examples for the OFT.

So if anyone knows of a good reason why non business sellers aren't covered by the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, please post here.

A little research would also have shown you that there's no point making an isolated complaint to the OFT because that's not the way these regulations are enforced - the OFT (which is the only relevant enforcer of these regulations) does not resolve individual disputes but usually persuades companies like ebay and groupon to see the error of their ways based on lots of examples.

So if anyone has any examples of unfair business practices, they'd be appreciated.

RFW

nothingventured wrote: »

RFW even though I've shown you the actual law, you're still basing your views on how you think things should be rather than how they actually are.

If you did as I asked in my original post and actually did some research, you'd find that the seller's rights are not at the expense of the buyer as you seem to think and that what I propose would help not only buyers and sellers but would actually make ebay a better and therefore more profitable marketplace for the site itself.

Crowqueen you're right that we are going round in circles but that's only because people don't read posts properly. The whole point of the OP was to see if anyone knew of any reason why the regulations quoted did not cover non-business sellers and if the regulations apply to those sellers to identify examples for the OFT.

I don't need to do any research, I couldn't care less, your misinterpretation of what you believe to be the law is your problem. As you have been inundated with people giving examples of unfair business practices it should be easy for you to be taken seriously by the OFT;) Best of luck with that.

If the OFT have taken Groupon to task after just a couple of years of trading in the UK why hasn't Ebay been brought to their attention after 12 years and considerably higher turnover? Could that possibly be because they have seen few consumer complaints and ignored a few whinging sellers?

Crowqueen

I suspect eBay has been brought to the OFT's attention, and that is why buyer protection is now so robust.

Every other item on Watchdog in round about 2005 was about eBay. Plus there was that hysterical anti-knives campaign which made eBay restrict most if not all cutlery sales to people with a credit card.

So I think there is scope for the OFT to investigate further if they think there is a problem - but the OP would have to get off the forum and start lobbying them to take a look. I don't think it's us they need to convince, but they are acting as if it is.

inmypocket

Not to bring up old arguments, but it is true that PayPal Inc. are now registered off-shore in Luxembourg. They are no longer bound by the FSA, however, they volunteered to continue to be regulated via the Financial Ombudsman Service should any consumer complaints arise. The FOS have a whole department specifically dedicated to PayPal cases should anybody ever require.

I can't really pass comment on the whole buyer/seller side of things with ebay, but as a customer of PayPal who has been fighting tirelessly against unfair limitations on my account, I'd say their customer support is pretty grim. Terrible main customer service call centres, terrible 'live chat' scripts (eBay)... Not to mention that under EU law they are able to lock/limit accounts without warning and without having to offer any kind of explanation, freezing funds for a minimum of 180 days when they do so. (Fortunately, as my account was purely as a payment method for ebay purchases I didn't have any money in my account to begin with!)

I logged into my account recently to find I face a permanent ban... Allegedly due to a 'buyer's complaint'. Except I have never sold anything on this account. There is no money having passed into the account at all within the last 12 months... So, why? Apparently because I share the same surname as somebody I work with whom is also banned.

We are in no way related other than a shared place of employment and yet PayPal do not care to hear about it. My limited 'cannot be appealed against'. They even went so far as to change details within my account such as addresses and account type.

I personally find that outrageous. If it weren't for eBay I would cut PayPal loose and advise people I know against using them altogether.

soolin

Not to mention that under EU law they are able to lock/limit accounts without
warning and without having to offer any kind of explanation, freezing funds for
a minimum of 180 days when they do so

Worth highlighting the bit where it is agreed they do this lawfully using EU laws.

unhappy_ebay_seller

Im not a blogger,writer, etc. however what ive been reading is true. Ive been a seller/buyer on ebay for 5 years, i have 311 100% positive feedback.. Recently i sold an item for $300 and shipped to a buyer with 10 100% feedback. When the item got there it was broken. The buyer said i didnt pack item correctly, box wasnt marked fragile, and i should have insured it. Just because ive done alot more business on ebay dosent make me right, i know this!! But i went to the postmaster and we reviewed tape showing the usps employee marking all 6 sides...so right away the person lied..i packed the item same as i have for 5 yrs. and when a buyer wants insured they request it!!! not me..After i faxed ebay a letter from my postmaster stating what video showed they still sided with the buyer!! they want me to pay back $300 and sent me my broken item back...lol this was completely unfair and i spoke to 6 diff. people noone would help!! Ebay ONLY protects the buyer..sellers cross your fingers!!! I QUIT THEM ALL TOGETHER.. God bless