Distance Selling Regulations and Ebay!

Knowyourrightsandusethem

Apologies if this has been raised before, but I don't have time to trawl through to make sure. I also have no doubt that for a first posting, many are going to find this contraversial and I anticipate the inevitable deluge of abusive replies from EBay sellers. However, 'Martin Lewis' is a consumer's 'Champion.'
Fortunately, the amount of purchases that have gone 'wrong;' for me on EBay are rare. However, every time they do, EBay support the seller in the first instance.- Whilst a simple Google Search, will take you to any number of websites that very clearly state that under Distance Selling Regulations, the seller is responsible for the cost of return P&P in the case of faulty goods or goods that are not as described, try searching EBay for the same subject, EBay refers to Distance Selling Regulations, but despite trawling through link after link on EBay, I have yet to see it on easilly found and clearly stated on EBay that buyers do not have to pay return P&P in such cases.
What angers me is that if you are forced to open a Resolution Case by an unreasonable seller, a 'standard' EBay response for the seller to return is - "Return the goods for a full refund - you are responsible for the cost of P&P!"
Even if this is the sellers T&Cs on EBay, Distance Selling Regulations make these T&Cs unlawful and inapplicable where the seller has supplied faulty goods or goods that are not as described! - Yet time and time again EBay advises buyers to return goods at their own expense in such cases. - This angers me immensely.
Often there appears to be a pattern with sellers that rely on EBay's support of 'those that pay the commission.' - When checking the feedback, it becomes obvious that that type of seller has done the same thing time and time again. - Usually it is low cost 'tat' that is either faulty, not as described, or so poorly packed that it gets damaged in transit. the cost of returning such items by a recorded method often outweighs the original costs and those who don't know their rights assume that as EBay advise of returning the goods at their own expense, must be the case in law!
I am increasingly concerned that there are a small minority of unscrupulous sellers on EBay, preying on those who don't know their rights and I am equally concerned about the 'advise' that Ebay gives to those vulnerable buyers to return the goods at their own expense again and again. - It is obvious from much of the feedback left in such cases that the buyer simply doesn't bother to return the goods and is left out of pocket, often stating that the cost of returning them would have been more than they paid for the item. - If they knew their rights (which EBay should be making clearly and easily available to them) buyers in such situations should be ignoring repeated demands to return the goods at their own expense and stand their ground for a full refund without returning the goods at all, unless the seller pays for the return of the goods.
I have an email from Ebay 'Buyer Support' in response to a message from myself asking why, they advise buyers of faulty goods or goods that are not supplied, to return the gods at their own cost contrary to Distance Selling Regulations and other Consumer Protection Legislation. - They will not explain to me why they give this advice despite three other emails from me asking why they are evading my very reasonable question.
I intend to take this matter as far as I possibly can, but I am a mere 'minnow.' I would really like to see somebody as 'high profile' as Martin Lewis take this on and will be trying other High Profile Consumer organisations. - I would welcome any other comments/suggestions (other than the anticipated abuse form EBay sellers) from anybody else who feels as strongly about this as I do.

wealdroam

You do understand that Distance Selling Regulations only apply when the seller is a business, don't you?

Do you also realise that it is not Ebay's job to enforce any law between the buyer and seller?

justjohn

contact trading standards ...they are in charge of enforcing it lol

RFW

As I understand Ebay are taking (slow) steps to make this happening, the recent/upcoming changes in handling returns are a step towards that.
It is also true that Ebay do often provide a buyer with a return postage label, often out of their own funds.
If you are making a point and want someone to listen to you, it would need to be more clearly laid out and easier to read than it is.
Some examples would also help. As you mention sellers that are repeat offenders an indication of who those are would be good.
Finally, as mentioned above DSRs do not apply to private sellers and are also only valid within the UK (and possibly Europe?). If you are buying from the rest of the world, the risk is on the buyer.

Knowyourrightsandusethem

Thanks so far. Conscious that the post was already lengthy, I omitted details such as - I am aware that DSRs only apply to Businesses and being UK legislation, only applies to transactions with UK businesses.
I am also conscious that EBay are not their to enforce the law, but I do think that this is a serious issue. - By not making the relevant sections of DSRs easy or clear to buyers AND advising buyers of faulty goods, or goods sent not as described tgo return them at their own cost, EBay clearly have a policy of supporting unscrupulous sellers. The business reasoning behind this is obvious in that it is sellers that pay commission, not buyers.
However with estimated profits in the UK of 800 million pounds on which they are evading much of the tax, I believe that real pressure needs to be brought about to 'clean up' Ebays act in the UK. They are assisting in the exploitation of often poor people who have little choice but to buy cheap and don't know their rights. They use use terms such as 'ethical' which they are clearly not and they make a huge fuss about their 'Money Back Guarantee' the full terms of which which don't even equal basic protection under UK Legislation.
Yes-I am making a point, but I do think that it is a serious one. I can afford to lose 'a few quid' but haven't yet on Ebay because I know my rights. I am concerned that due to the way that EBay 'attempt' to operate and clearly often succeed, it is those that can't afford to lose money and don't know their rights that suffer.
I would like to think that this is a 'right and proper' cause and that it is serious enough for Martin Lewis to take on, should it reach him. In the meantime, I will also be trying others such as Watchdog and Dominic Littlewood.

RFW

Knowyourrightsandusethem wrote: »

I would like to think that this is a 'right and proper' cause and that it is serious enough for Martin Lewis to take on, should it reach him. In the meantime, I will also be trying others such as Watchdog and Dominic Littlewood.

They'd probably want to see some examples too rather than a rant and some made up 'facts'.

soolin

Ebay cannot take away your rights to use small claims to recover your return postage, and incidentally if you go to the vent and warnings board you will see that there are plently of other main stream retailers who are also unaware of their responsibility to refurn return postage.

Knowyourrightsandusethem

RFW wrote: »

They'd probably want to see some examples too rather than a rant and some made up 'facts'.

Here we go. Didn't think it would take too long! Where is your evidence that I have made anything up? I have only quoted facts, such as the indisputable relevant sections of the Distance Selling Regulations. I am happy to send on any of the emails between myself and EBay 'Customer Support.' EBay's UK tax evasion has been widely publicised by the Media. Numerous examples of sellers not bothering to return items etc as they believed that had to pay the costs are evident by reading into the feedback!

It doesn't take too much working out as to why anybody would be against this 'making some some ground.' - I personally have nothing to gain and have lost nothing. But then not everybody thinks of other's less fortunate as a motive for doing anything!:money:

RFW

Knowyourrightsandusethem wrote: »

Here we go. Didn't think it would take too long! Where is your evidence that I have made anything up? I have only quoted facts, such as the indisputable relevant sections of the Distance Selling Regulations.

Knowyourrightsandusethem wrote: »

They use use terms such as 'ethical' which they are clearly not and they make a huge fuss about their 'Money Back Guarantee' the full terms of which which don't even equal basic protection under UK Legislation.

That's pretty made up.

So to sum up you have no personal evidence, you don't represent anybody but you have read feedback from disgruntled customers.

I actually have one of those feedbacks: a customer had a problem with an item so I refunded in full, he later returned the item and complained on feedback that he had to pay return postage. I never asked him to return it, I was quite happy for him to keep it or throw away.

As I said if you want to proceed with a case to any form of media you would need examples of a seller with consistent feedback of sending faulty items and forcing buyers to pay return postage as you suggest this is prevalent. I would suggest to you that the detailed seller rating system would put a stop to sellers doing this persistently. I'm happy to be proved wrong by you sharing some seller ids, do it by private message if you prefer.

Having a rant is all well and good backing it up with evidence is a necessity.

You can also read many threads on here where I inform buyers that it is their right to refund of return postage on not as described/faulty items. As mentioned above people have rights to legal action and to contact Trading Standards.

Knowyourrightsandusethem

RFW wrote: »

That's pretty made up.

We clearly speak different versions of The English Language! I didn't realise that quoting facts, legislation and referring to EBay member feedback that is there for anybody to read and interpret amounted to 'making things up!' However, I stand to be corrected and don't have a 'default position' assuming that only I am right and that anybody that doesn't agree with my point of view must be wrong!

At least you have been 'open' in admitting that you are a seller on EBay! I don't therefore think I need to go into amateur phsychology to try to understand your position on my posting. The use of the word 'rant' always interests me in forums when used by people with their own agenda when disagreeing with the postings of others!

Here are some more 'facts' that I don't have to prove, - I have lost nothing, and do not seek anything other than the support of somebody with influence to pursue a campaign to force EBay to 'clean up their act' in order to protect the vulnerable and those that don't know their rights. I can understand that 'some' might find that hard to understand and that 'some' may be frightenend of such an idea gaining the necessary support. I also understand that there are those who will always be on the lookout to try to exploit loopholes to get something for nothing from decent sellers on EBay and I would equally support any campaign against those sort of people despite not being a business seller myself and despite the fact that I would have nothing to gain from giving such support! - Is that so hard to understand. - Perhaps it is in this increasingly selfish world that we live in.

George_Michael

Knowyourrightsandusethem wrote: »

! Where is your evidence that I have made anything up?

Well, there's this for a start.

Knowyourrightsandusethem wrote: »

EBay's UK tax evasion has been widely publicised by the Media.

Their tax evasion has not been publicised. However, their tax avoidance has.
Learning the difference before accusing a company of an illegal act wouldn't be a bad idea.

The world’s largest online marketplace eBay has avoided paying £50m corporate tax in Britain through legal tax-avoidance schemes

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/9623637/eBay-avoids-paying-50m-tax-in-UK.html