When new is not new on ebay!

AMILLIONDOLLARS

Scrolling down some items, I noticed a few were claiming to be "New Without Tag". When reading the description I notice that a few seller were claiming that they had worn the item several or a couple of times!!

How can they get away with claiming that the item is New in the main listing header, shouldn't Ebay be clamping down on things like this?

What takes the biscuit is when they photograph themselves wearing the outfit whilst claiming it has never been worn:rotfl:


AMD

duckeggblue

Sometimes I list a lot of items,then go back later to add more details.It is not stuff worn by me, and is a mixture of bnwt and used,and I forget which.sometimes its just error.

hermum

duckeggblue wrote: »

Sometimes I list a lot of items,then go back later to add more details.It is not stuff worn by me, and is a mixture of bnwt and used,and I forget which.sometimes its just error.

That's a pretty bad error to make. Something's either new, which means unused,unworn& in perfect condition.
If I thought that I was likely to make a mistake I'd err on theside of caution & list everything as used.
I do hope that you pay return costs when you mistakenly list a used item as new.

Taadaa

There are still a lot of sellers who seem to think it's acceptable to list something as new when it has been used. Even if it has been used once, it is still used, not new. The reason they do this is new with tags/in packaging items usually go for far more money than used ones.

I once had to e mail a private seller as I got a DVD, marked as new, which was clearly used. I e mailed them - their reply was 'if you want new, go to Woolies!!!' (this was a few years back now). This is the sort of behaviour that would get a seller barred these days after a couple of instances.

Wywth

AMILLIONDOLLARS wrote: »

When new is not new on ebay!

When it's being offered by Argos Outlet.

Usually customer/warranty returns.

You've been warned

epm-84

AMILLIONDOLLARS wrote: »

What takes the biscuit is when they photograph themselves wearing the outfit whilst claiming it has never been worn:rotfl:

If you buy clothes from a normal shop they've quite often been tried on by someone before you buy them.

AMILLIONDOLLARS

epm-84 wrote: »

If you buy clothes from a normal shop they've quite often been tried on by someone before you buy them.

There's a fine line between try on and worn, Tried On, the item should be sweat free under the armpits. Worn give it a good wash and call it Used.

Here's a quote from a listing

The item has only been worn once therefore in new condition:eek:

shouldn't be allowed!

Here is Ebay's rule on what a New Listing without taga should be:
New without tags: A brand-new, unused and unworn item that is not in its original retail packaging or may be missing its original retail packaging materials (such as the original box or bag). The original tags may not be attached. For example, new shoes (with absolutely no signs of wear) that are no longer in their original box fall into this category.

AMD

alykatz

recently bought 2 new and unused pairs of boots for my daughters. Both were from different private sellers.
Needless to say both pairs had been worn at least once and had obvious signs of waer on the soles.. Both sellers attitude wasnt very good tbh.One actually told me i had got a bargain as she had paid a lot for them and i should be grateful she completed the sale as i got them very cheaply..
Whilst i understand people want a good return on anything they sell,they should list at the least they want for any item. I honestly dont get why they think that its perfectly ok to misdescribe items..

epm-84

AMILLIONDOLLARS wrote: »

For example, new shoes (with absolutely no signs of wear) that are no longer in their original box fall into this category.

AMD

Slight issue with that eBay description - what if you weren't given a box when they were sold to you but the shoes contain an original tag?