Looks like ebay has decied to change the law for business sellers

RFW

Road_Hog wrote: »

Also posted by you.

"You do claim to be on your third Paypal account, there's a level of dishonesty there surely? Or at the very least immorality."

I think that that was your argument.

It was certainly part of it but you do seem to be on one cycle of discussion so it isn't really worth it.
Your argument appears to be "it's ok for me to close Paypal accounts with a negative balance, open a new one and expect others to pay for my poor management as Ebay don't pay enough tax", so no real point in arguing against that.

George_Michael

Road_Hog wrote: »

I'm going to make this really simple, I don't like people who support a company that avoids paying tax

Surely by continuing to use ebay and paypal you yourself are supporting them by paying fees that increase their profits.
If you really didn't support them, you would have closed down your accounts totally instead of continuing to open new ones.

soolin

George_Michael wrote: »

Surely by continuing to use ebay and paypal you yourself are supporting them by paying fees that increase their profits.
If you really didn't support them, you would have closed down your accounts totally instead of continuing to open new ones.

What a logical argument, well said.:T

RFW

George_Michael wrote: »

Surely by continuing to use ebay and paypal you yourself are supporting them by paying fees that increase their profits.
If you really didn't support them, you would have closed down your accounts totally instead of continuing to open new ones.

It might be different if you get to pick and choose which fees you want to pay.

earthstorm

earthstorm wrote: »

I have been given a contact email for someone at the OFT who works with the European Union's Consumer Rights Directive, so i am in the process of sending of an email to them

so for those who say that Trading Standard down have power etc. should read this letter from the OFT.

Telephone
O8457 22 44 99
EPIC/ENQ/E/153003
Fax
(020) 7211 8877

22 August 2013
Email
[EMAIL="Enquiries@oft.gsi.gov.uk"]Enquiries@oft.gsi.gov.uk[/EMAIL]


Dear Mr ********


Thank you for your email of 16 August 2013 to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT)
regarding your enquiry about the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations
2000 (the DSRs). You would like advice on how changes to the DSRs from June 2014 will affect your business.


By way of background, the primary duties of the OFT include the enforcement of competition law, and the application of consumer protection legislation in respect of matters that adversely affect the collective interest of consumers.


Please note that we cannot provide consumers or businesses with advice about how the DSRs may be interpreted or applied as ultimately these are matters that only a court can decide.


From 2 April 2013, under changes to the consumer landscape introduced by Government, there is a greater role for the local authority Trading Standards Services (TSS) in the enforcement of consumer protection law at national level. You may therefore find it helpful to contact your local authority TSS for advice on how changes to the DSRs will apply to your business. Its contact details can be found via the following link:



www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/advice/advice-business.cfm

I hope this information proves helpful. Yours sincerely


Samit Patel
Enquiriesand Reporting Centre
[FONT=&quot]O[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ffice of Fair Trading[/FONT]

RFW

earthstorm wrote: »

so for those who say that Trading Standard down have power etc. should read this letter from the OFT.

http://db.tt/yqqvQhtQ

The only problem is that they work for the consumer, as a seller of goods, you aren't a consumer. The consumer has an increased level of protection from Ebay, why would Trading Standards want to support your attempts to take that away?

Road_Hog

soolin wrote: »

The buyers have paid though and your stand off merely inconveniences them, neither ebay or paypal care .

Okay, coming back to this thread a bit late, but let's answer the replies.

The buyers have paid paypal, for MY goods. paypal are sitting on the money. There isn't any valid reason for it, it isn't like they're running any checks, they're holding on it for 72 hours and then automatically releasing it.

I've spoken to their call centre and asked what verification they need to release the money and the answer is none.

The only people inconveniencing the buyer is ebay/paypal. I'm not in the charity business and I'm not in the business of trusting paypal to send the money. paypal can send the money any time they like and as soon as they do, I'll send the goods.

So please don't try and blame me for paypal's issues, the blame lies fairly and squarely at their door. But you are certainly right in your last sentence, ebay/paypal don't care, they talk about customer service and quick delivery but are happy to sit on the money for 3 days and pretend that it is down to a bad seller.

Road_Hog

RFW wrote: »

Your argument appears to be "it's ok for me to close Paypal accounts with a negative balance, open a new one and expect others to pay for my poor management as Ebay don't pay enough tax", so no real point in arguing against that.

Ebay pay virtually no tax, not 'enough tax', they paid 1.2 million on an £800 million turnover, if you think that that is okay, then that's up to you, it's legal and you're paying for it.

Just as it is legal, for me to leave ebay with negative balances, then write to them and tell them that they have not adhered to civil law and if they want the money, then get an LBA sent out as quick as possible. They've not done that, which leads me to believe that they didn't adhere to civil law.

I'm not costing you anything, you know ebay/paypal fees and you pay them, anytime you don't want to pay them, stop using them. Plus if ebay was in the right, then they would have taken me to court or at least their debt collectors would have, but they didn't.

Road_Hog

George_Michael wrote: »

Surely by continuing to use ebay and paypal you yourself are supporting them by paying fees that increase their profits.
If you really didn't support them, you would have closed down your accounts totally instead of continuing to open new ones.

Yes, your first sentence is true, however, on occasion, it makes financial sense to use them.

Road_Hog

earthstorm wrote: »

so for those who say that Trading Standard down have power etc. should read this letter from the OFT.

http://db.tt/yqqvQhtQ

Trading Standards are pretty toothless.

I remember that they wrote to me on behalf of an ebay customer, one that tried to return a mobile phone to me that was actually a different phone (different IMEI number). I used to take photos of all phones I sold, because there were so many scammers.

I didn't even reply (it costs me time and money), they didn't even follow it up. And before the usual ebay cheerleaders start, no, I don't treat buyers like dirt, if they are pleasant pay the advertised price and have a problem, I'm only too happy to help or refund, even if it is their mistake. I don't like rude or unpleasant people or those that try to scam me or threaten me with bad feedback if I don't give them a discount etc.