The Guardian - sellers beware listing on Ebay

Stoke

RFW wrote: »

Which policy?

The policy of guilty until proven innocent.

RFW

Stoke wrote: »

The policy of guilty until proven innocent.

I'm still not with you. Do you mean taking the word of a buyer over a seller when there is no proof of delivery? If so in most cases I can't see how Ebay can do any different, only on the occasions when it's fairly transparent that the buyer does it regularly can there be any difference.
Or is there something I'm missing and you're referring to some policy that I don't know about?

techspec

RFW wrote: »

I'm still not with you. Do you mean taking the word of a buyer over a seller when there is no proof of delivery? If so in most cases I can't see how Ebay can do any different, only on the occasions when it's fairly transparent that the buyer does it regularly can there be any difference.
Or is there something I'm missing and you're referring to some policy that I don't know about?

Ebay / paypal always say use tracked - they then throw you off for using tracked - as your marked down for postage cost.

I think if Ebay wont give sellers time to get a refund off royal mail first (and insist buyers co-operate) - then if you can prove postage EBAY could cover all loses out of their vast profits.

At the very least - you should be limited to the number of INR claims you can make (where sellers proves sent).

Even if you say its not your fault - you live in an area where the post always goes missing - you could stop ordering and give everyone a break.

You should definately NOT get a negative or low stars for INR where you can prove posting.

RFW

techspec wrote: »

I think if Ebay wont give sellers time to get a refund off royal mail first (and insist buyers co-operate) - then if you can prove postage EBAY could cover all loses out of their vast profits.

Proof of postage isn't really much in itself though. I can sell a Rolex watch and get proof of postage for sending an empty box. If Ebay were covering that I've a feeling we'd all be paying more in fees.

I still don't know what 'policy' was being referred to that needed changing.

custardy

techspec wrote: »

Ebay / paypal always say use tracked - they then throw you off for using tracked - as your marked down for postage cost.

I think if Ebay wont give sellers time to get a refund off royal mail first (and insist buyers co-operate) - then if you can prove postage EBAY could cover all loses out of their vast profits.

At the very least - you should be limited to the number of INR claims you can make (where sellers proves sent).

Even if you say its not your fault - you live in an area where the post always goes missing - you could stop ordering and give everyone a break.

You should definately NOT get a negative or low stars for INR where you can prove posting.

would you be happy waiting a couple of months for a refund?

Brooker_Dave

RFW wrote: »

The problem Ebay have is that most people that have problems get them from their own mistakes yet they often have an inability to see the genuine hard done to folk.

"In the case of one reader, Matt Mawson, the buyer managed to arrange a refund and keep the goods. Mawson sold an amplifer on eBay and dispatched it via a 48-hour courier service. "Within 36 hours of the sale the buyer emailed to say he needed it quickly and, because it hadn't arrived, he intended to claim a refund," Mawson says. "I instructed the courier to return the item to me and said I'd refund him when it was accounted for but, instead, the buyer arranged a forced refund via eBay while also taking delivery of the item – so he now has my amplifier and my money."

Rebecca Barrow started a business selling products on eBay to supplement her hairdressing income. "I began to discover the flaws, as buyers were claiming their item wasn't received even though I had proof of postage. Ebay said I had to refund them as I had not sent them recorded delivery," she says.

"One buyer opened a case with eBay saying she had not received an item. I provided all the evidence, including the parcel tracking number and proof that delivery had been attempted three days after the order. eBay still closed the case in the buyer's favour. The buyer received a refund, then collected the item from the post office and left me negative feedback. "

What did the two people above do wrong (other than trust ebay/paypayl) ?

Brooker_Dave

soolin wrote: »

I assume the UK laws that give buyers all sorts of rights...hmm, can ebay force legal changes in the UK I wonder.

Which UK law forces a private seller to refund someone if they get buyers remorse?

RFW

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

What did the two people above do wrong (other than trust ebay/paypayl) ?

If you could read the quote of mine YOU quoted again that would be appreciated. It appears you missed my point.

sequence

Ebay policy is fine. What they need to do is do more to find and ban buyers who habitually use the resolution center. All they need is a filter, say more than 10 cases a year or 5% of transactions opening case, would prompt investigation by a human to see if there's anything amiss.

Stoke

RFW wrote: »

I'm still not with you. Do you mean taking the word of a buyer over a seller when there is no proof of delivery? If so in most cases I can't see how Ebay can do any different, only on the occasions when it's fairly transparent that the buyer does it regularly can there be any difference.
Or is there something I'm missing and you're referring to some policy that I don't know about?

No, but it's not hard to find sellers who have had scammers buy an item, then return the item in either worse condition, broken or in some cases a different item altogether. eBay refuse to acknowledge a sellers claim that the item has been damaged/replaced/altered by the buyer, they find you guilty and refund the buyer. If eBay did some more investigation, they would find out more.

Like I've said in another thread, I sold an iPhone which was subsequently disassembled and broken by the buyer. She tugged on my sympathetic side so I agreed to accept the phone back (unaware of what had happened to it) for a refund. What arrived was a device in bits. She admitted in two different messages that she'd disassembled the device and reassembled it incorrectly. I got a qualified Apple technician to rebuild the device but it was damaged beyond repair. Despite providing printouts of her messages + photos of the device + the report from the Apple technician, uploaded online AND sent in the post to their HQ, eBay found in her favour and forced me to refund. Only after a massive row on the phone did they change their decision to 50/50. I was still left out of pocket though.