Item not as described return but labels now removed?

Flyonthewall

soolin wrote: »

I was surprised to read that one, perhaps it was long enough ago not to fall under the new very stringent SNAD rules.

I think I have read of a similar case to the golf clubs, but a long time ago. Things have no doubt changed since.

A no fault refund is always a possibility.

Kim_13

March/April 2012 if I recall correctly.

It might be a grey area depending on the opinion of the eBay rep who picks up the case. This buyer should get nothing; they made the alteration and could reasonably have noticed the sleeves were shorter before doing so (more than can be said for my father's alteration.) A shop would not accept a return without tags.

In this case I would argue that the buyer would not receive a refund under the Consumer Rights Act. S20(18) would seem to be the new version of the part of the Sale of Goods Act where a buyer would be deemed to have accepted the goods if they were altered.

Moogles44

She just sent this " I think it's okay, apparently tags are supposed to be cut or removed for eBay selling but I don't think many people comply with it - but it shouldn't affect the price as long as it is mentioned"

I've never ever heard this before. Is this true? It totally affects price in my opinion

Money_maker

Sellers selling brand new clothing will deface the labels or receive defaced labels to prevent store returns. Most chain stores can be easily identified from defaced labels and there is no need to remove them as they usually have sizes/washing instructions on them.

If your item was second hand there was no need whatsoever to remove any labels. Wonder if she's telling the truth?

steveE2

Moogles44 wrote: »

She just sent this " I think it's okay, apparently tags are supposed to be cut or removed for eBay selling but I don't think many people comply with it - but it shouldn't affect the price as long as it is mentioned"

I've never ever heard this before. Is this true? It totally affects price in my opinion

Utter rubbish
If that were the case ebay wouldn't differentiate between New with tags-New without tags.
http://pages.ebay.co.uk/help/sell/item-condition.html#clothing_acc

Kim_13

Exactly what Steve said.

It will affect price, especially in the case of designer items I'd say. As a buyer, I'd be more likely to avoid an item of this kind without tags for fear it's counterfeit.

If it's "okay" she won't mind selling it on herself if she doesn't want it, will she

This particular claim of hers should help your case - she just makes herself look like someone who will say anything to get a refund.

Moogles44

Thanks everyone , I thought that was rubbish. Yes my coat was used so no need to remove them anyway . The thing is why did she remove them? She was obviously going to fraudulently make out that it was a very old vintage coat and not a recent popular label

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Sorry if it's a silly question but if the sleeves have been taken up, can't they just be taken down again?

If they can and eBay force the return you should resell and then invoice your current buyer for the difference.

If they can't then invoice her for the difference minus an appropriate amount that the alternations would devalue the coat by.

If you also believe they are passing items off as vintage that aren't then send a copy of their statements to the buyers council's consumer protection department.

Moogles44

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head wrote: »

Sorry if it's a silly question but if the sleeves have been taken up, can't they just be taken down again?

If they can and eBay force the return you should resell and then invoice your current buyer for the difference.

If they can't then invoice her for the difference minus an appropriate amount that the alternations would devalue the coat by.

If you also believe they are passing items off as vintage that aren't then send a copy of their statements to the buyers council's consumer protection department.

She said that they are faded so she can't , which is fair enough.

I just rung ebay , as ever super helpful to the seller . I said you can see her messages saying this . My options;
Either I can refuse the return in which I highly likely loose coat AND money or I can pay for label
Send return label and contest it after I get it. - I said surely ebay will then say I knew it had no labels when I sent label so I will lose?
She just said that's my only options. Why thank you ebay, always with the seller :mad::mad:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

eBay claim they'll consider appeals, when we had a problem with a return they asked for a photo (wasn't feasible), they removed the defect but wouldn't return the money and sent us an email about taking the buyer to court....

The only thing is I'm not sure if you can appeal if you voluntary refund, you should accept the return and the flow will provide the buyer a label (which eBay will add £2.99 to your invoice for if it's a Royal Mail label) otherwise eBay will refund without a return as they noted to you.

Once you get the coat back take a picture of the missing label, send the buyer a message via eBay with the photo f the missing labels (you can attach the image directly to the eBay message using the attach photos button next to the send message button).

Don't refund, the buyer asks eBay to step in who refund, then you appeal.

That's the way of returns and appeals as I understand it.

Depending on how much hassle you want and how much the coat was, I'd accept the return but as above invoice then for the difference when re-sold, advising the buyer that this will be what's happening.

They purchased as a business so don't have any consumer rights, true the coat should be as described but I can't see a judge not finding in your favour because a business cut the labels out of something to falsely describe it as vintage and then wanted to send it back to a private seller.

A Paypal invoice followed by a notice before action should see your buyer cough up for the difference and would be less of a headache than trying to appeal via eBay IMHO.