ebay seller lied and won the dispute

arcon5

bobeh110 wrote: »

i am writing to the financial ombudsman as well.

Why?

............

bod1467

What will the FOS do? How are they relevant to this dispute?

ETA - SNAP!

Guardsman

They may not do anything in this case but then again they may point the OP in the right direction.

bobeh110

Paypal told me i was not allowed to know what this man said against me or see the document he signed which proved that i sent him a different phone. - surely i should be allowed this in order to take this to court.

I have also looked into his feedback and turns out just over a year ago he has done the same thing and won the case with another ebayer.

MothballsWallet

Actually, if you take him to court couldn't you name Paypal as an extra defendant, or would you just have to put in the claim form that Paypal have been involved but will not disclose the paperwork he has signed as that's material?

I could be barking up the wrong tree though, it's been known to happen.

arcon5

MothballsWallet wrote: »

Actually, if you take him to court couldn't you name Paypal as an extra defendant, or would you just have to put in the claim form that Paypal have been involved but will not disclose the paperwork he has signed as that's material?

I could be barking up the wrong tree though, it's been known to happen.

PayPal wouldn't be a party to this contract involving a faulty phone....

however.... I suppose it could be worth op reading their terms relating to their buyer protection policy in case they have in any way breached the contract between them and op as a payment processor.

Which leaves me wondering... if they have in fact breached their own policies/contract, could this perhaps be grounds for a chargeback or section 75 claim against PayPal....

(Just throwing some thoughts out here..)

pinkshoes

As you have the seller's name and address, then your next step is to send him a LETTER BEFORE ACTION.

You need to write a description of what happened, state the phone was faulty, state you sent the phone (IMEI number) back on <date>, which he signed for on <date>. I'd go on to say that since you have now returned the phone, you are giving him 14 days from receipt of the letter to refund the £100, otherwise you he leaves you with no option but to take him to court for the money.

Send it with proof of postage from TWO post offices, just to make sure he gets it!

dalesrider

arcon5 wrote: »

Which leaves me wondering... if they have in fact breached their own policies/contract, could this perhaps be grounds for a chargeback or section 75 claim against PayPal....

(Just throwing some thoughts out here..)

I guess you could try faulty goods, but you have no proof that it was faulty.
No refund ? Nope you have no proof of a refund.
No chargeback for dodgy people...

S75. No chance. As Paypal, will show as the company the payment was to. And they have not doing anything wrong. They simply moved the money.
If a credit card was used they will simply say no creditor/debitor link.

As well as paypal, don't ebay have their own dispute process. Given that you have now found the seller pulled this stunt last year. Could be a way forward.

dalesrider

pinkshoes wrote: »

Send it with proof of postage from TWO post offices, just to make sure he gets it!

Noo....

Send it recorded delivery. That way you get to see if its signed for.

Proof of posting would be very shaky grounds in court as the seller will simply say never recieved it.

arcon5

dalesrider wrote: »

I guess you could try faulty goods, but you have no proof that it was faulty.
No refund ? Nope you have no proof of a refund.
No chargeback for dodgy people...

S75. No chance. As Paypal, will show as the company the payment was to. And they have not doing anything wrong. They simply moved the money.
If a credit card was used they will simply say no creditor/debitor link.

As well as paypal, don't ebay have their own dispute process. Given that you have now found the seller pulled this stunt last year. Could be a way forward.

Actually you'll find the service PayPal provide is a little more than simply moving money!

Their user agreement includes a buyer protection policy, which actually states:

PayPal Buyer Protection helps you with either of these problems:

1. [snip]
2. You received an item you paid for with PayPal but it is “Significantly Not as Described” (“SNAD”). Further information on what we mean by “SNAD” is set out in section 13.9.

If op paid by CC then PayPal don't seem to condone initiating a CC chargeback, their terms stating:

You may pursue a Claim or Dispute with PayPal, or you may contact your credit card company or credit card issuer and pursue your chargeback rights. You may not pursue both at the same time or seek a double recovery.

So either there is a term supporting PayPals decision which isn't obvious or they have breached their own policy.

Especially since from what I can see PayPal claim to not offer seller protection for SNAD claims:

11.10 What are examples of items/transactions/cases that are not eligible for PayPal seller protection?d. Claims, Chargebacks and Reversals for Significantly Not as Described; and/ or claims filed directly with eBay.

Have PayPal breached their own user agreement? Well it's definitely worth op doing some detailed reading of it to see if it is. A perhaps consider a chargeback - after all their breach would be what has cost op £x, for which the CC company would be equally liable for.