Counterfeit Item from Ebay

theonlywayisup

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

"Quite clear" until it gets down to actually get a resolution under their buyer protection that is.


http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=65088689&postcount=24

Buyer protection just gets stronger for the buyer day by day (or years in your example)!

You can't go by an incident in 2013....I'm guessing the date from your post. But you get my drift. Move on.

shaun_from_Africa

theonlywayisup wrote: »

You can't go by an incident in 2013....I'm guessing the date from your post. But you get my drift. Move on.

How about an almost identical incident to the one I posted about but this one is from less than 3 weeks ago?


https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5167209

theonlywayisup

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

How about an almost identical incident to the one I posted about but this one is from less than 3 weeks ago?


https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5167209

Ah yes, a 3 [STRIKE]week ago [/STRIKE]poster, we can all pull those up!

So yours in 2013 and a newbie. Not bad going. Hardly rife.

But as I said, my point was protection has changed; for bonafide cases

shaun_from_Africa

theonlywayisup wrote: »

But as I said, my point was protection has changed; for bonafide cases

How can it have changed if the poster in question had the same experience as me?
Because the poster of the case I linked to only has a short history on MSE you automatically think that what they posted isn't true?


In that case, I assume that the first few posts that you made on MSE were also not true.

theonlywayisup

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

How can it have changed if the poster in question had the same experience as me?
Because the poster of the case I linked to only has a short history on MSE you automatically think that what they posted isn't true?

How can it have changed?

Things do, might be difficult for you to grasp, but that's life.

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

In that case, I assume that the first few posts that you made on MSE were also not true.

No, because that was many years ago, unlike you I accept things change. Look at the sticky and see all the edits....

Your post of 2013 isn't relevant to quote in a 2015 query.

If you need help keeping up, perhaps subscribe or stay current with eBay announcements 2013 was an ok year but you need to let it go,

shaun_from_Africa

theonlywayisup wrote: »

Your post of 2013 isn't relevant to quote in a 2015 query.

But what about the post of 3 weeks ago that was specifically about buying fakes on ebay and not getting the return postage costs refunded.
Surely that must be relevant?

Collabora

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

But what about the post of 3 weeks ago that was specifically about buying fakes on ebay and not getting the return postage costs refunded.
Surely that must be relevant?

well they Newbie 3 weeks ago gave very little information to say either way

martindow

There used to be a difference between opening a claim through Ebay or Paypal. I think one required the seller to prove it is genuine and the other required the buyer to show it is fake.

If this is still true you need to open a claim with the correct one.

bxboards

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

But what about the post of 3 weeks ago that was specifically about buying fakes on ebay and not getting the return postage costs refunded.
Surely that must be relevant?

I have been asked to returns fakes twice.

Item one was a fake Sony battery - to double the insult, you are not even allowed to post batteries not connected to a device now. This was within the last 3 months.

Item two was a fake CD. Again I was told I had to return it - to Russia!


In my very recent experience Ebay may still ask for these to be returned. You either return them or don't get a refund.

Ebay 'rules' change with the wind - much will depend on the customer service agent dealing with it, as with much else on Ebay.

shaun_from_Africa

Collabora wrote: »

well they Newbie 3 weeks ago gave very little information to say either way

But there is a very big difference between saying that a poster hasn't given enough information and totally dismissing what a poster has stated simply because they are new to the forum.

theonlywayisup wrote: »

Ah yes, a 3 [STRIKE]week ago [/STRIKE]poster, we can all pull those up!

So yours in 2013 and a newbie. Not bad going. Hardly rife.

But as I said, my point was protection has changed; for bonafide cases

Even though the new poster didn't give too much information, they still stated that they received fake goods, something that the seller admitted to yet they were still having problems getting ebay to accept that it wasn't a simple change of mind return that they wanted.

If we were all to take the same blinkered approach to newbies as theonlywayisup seems to have, there may as well be a total ban on new members signing up to ask questions.

I wonder if theonlywayisup also thinks that the cases that bxboards had were not "bonafide"?