eBay seller sold faulty goods - refused refund

LandOfConfusion

This is ongoing but so far:

I purchased a model airplane off a private seller on eBay. His feedback was good and the only picture of the plane didn't show anything that you wouldn't expect from a secondhand plane.

The auction was listed with eBay as "Used" (maybe some signs of damage, etc) and he described it as:

"Only flown a few times and flys well. Selling as spares or repairs as has been sat un-used for 6 mths now"

But on arrival I found:

• One of the two batteries was dead and the other was in a bad shape.
• The plane had more crash damage than was evident in the pictures (conveniently bad lighting in photo's).
  
• The right-hand (starboard) servo was not returning to center and was having difficulty moving to different locations.
• The very expensive receiver was damaged and unusable.

But the transmitter, decal sheet and battery charger were all in excellent condition, just as you'd expect from a little used plane.


Now given that the port servo works fine and the receiver housing in the plane was damaged I think it's almost certain the plane has been in a crash and that this has resulted in the failing servo and bad receiver.



I've opened a case with eBay and been in contact with the seller and he's gave me two choices:


1. I can keep the plane and a derisory part-refund or

2. I can return the plane at my expense and he'll refund the auction amount only (not postage either way).


I have refused both these options.


So now I have a plane which has clearly been crash damaged and has faults that would have been obvious during operation. I also cannot see how these faults could have occurred in storage, unless stored in very bad conditions but then everything else is intact and the port servo works fine.


So my question is where do I stand?

marliepanda

Probably nowhere. It was advertised as 'signs of damage' and it's damaged. It was advertised as spares or repair, implying it's only good to repair or strip down to fix other stuff and no good on its own.

LandOfConfusion

Hi marliepanda and thanks for the reply.

My issue is that he stated that it had "Only flown a few times and flys well"

but that can't be true as the damage appears to be crash damage and one of the batteries was very unbvalanced, which can only come from excessive use.

I've also just seen a post on whatconsumer which states:

Fraudulent misrepresentation
A fraudulent misrepresentation is a statement of fact made without belief in its truth either recklessly, knowingly or without caring whether it is true or false, with the intention that it should be acted on and, is in fact acted on.

He's stated that it had only been stored and was stored working but that's clearly not the case and I have relied upon that to judge whether or not to buy the item.

I suspect he's being deceptive but I guess we'll just have to find out what eBay says.

wealdroam

Maybe consider posting on the Ebay board.

Ebay will probably insist that you return the goods and are refunded all the money you have paid. With a little bit of persuasion, ebay may provide a paid returns label, and will either fund that themselves or deduct the cost from the seller.

bris

He stated it was unused for 6 months so sold as spares or repair, you should always head this warning. You thought otherwise thinking it was a bargain and took a gamble.


You can now use it for how it was sold, either repair it or use it for spares. You have no right to a refund, although Ebay usually just give you one anyway. This is why I don't sell on Ebay anymore, buyer just ignore the obvious and get to return things anyway.

AJXX

bris wrote: »

You can now use it for how it was sold, either repair it or use it for spares. You have no right to a refund, although Ebay usually just give you one anyway. This is why I don't sell on Ebay anymore, buyer just ignore the obvious and get to return things anyway.

I have to say (as a former eBay seller) that I completely agree with the above. BUT I somewhat feel for the OP over this one - I mean granted the dead battery's could simply be due to improper storage over the last x months but the servo and receiver not working are something that the seller should have placed on the listing.

Allow me to explain;

If the seller has gone to the trouble of writing "flys well" on the listing then that would suggest to me that the aircraft does indeed fly well and that the seller has tested the aircraft to some degree before listing - it should therefore have mentioned about the servo and receiver.

Had the seller simply listed the item as S/R without saying "flys well" then I'd agree that the OP's argument should be thrown out, but as the seller listed the item as "flys well" this suggests to me some sort of testing preformed by the seller (which evidently wasn't true or several things overlooked - in which case the seller should have simply listed as S/R and mentioned that receiver hadn't been tested etc...)

I'm not saying the OP is 100% right, but I do feel for the OP over this one as something doesn't quite add up, unfortunately OP did take a gamble on a S/R item which hasn't paid off so not an awful lot he/she can do.

peachyprice

LandOfConfusion wrote: »

The auction was listed with eBay as "Used" (maybe some signs of damage, etc) and he described it as:

"Only flown a few times and flys well. Selling as spares or repairs as has been sat un-used for 6 mths now"

He sold it as showing signs of damage and for 'spares or repair'. That would give a clear indication that he didn't know whether it worked or not. If you wanted a working plane you should have asked further questions.

bris

AJXX wrote: »

I have to say (as a former eBay seller) that I completely agree with the above. BUT I somewhat feel for the OP over this one - I mean granted the dead battery's could simply be due to improper storage over the last x months but the servo and receiver not working are something that the seller should have placed on the listing.

Allow me to explain;

If the seller has gone to the trouble of writing "flys well" on the listing then that would suggest to me that the aircraft does indeed fly well and that the seller has tested the aircraft to some degree before listing - it should therefore have mentioned about the servo and receiver.

Had the seller simply listed the item as S/R without saying "flys well" then I'd agree that the OP's argument should be thrown out, but as the seller listed the item as "flys well" this suggests to me some sort of testing preformed by the seller (which evidently wasn't true or several things overlooked - in which case the seller should have simply listed as S/R and mentioned that receiver hadn't been tested etc...)

I'm not saying the OP is 100% right, but I do feel for the OP over this one as something doesn't quite add up, unfortunately OP did take a gamble on a S/R item which hasn't paid off so not an awful lot he/she can do.

I see the argument.

peachyprice wrote: »

He sold it as showing signs of damage and for 'spares or repair'. That would give a clear indication that he didn't know whether it worked or not. If you wanted a working plane you should have asked further questions.

But this is more appropriate.

NotRichAtAll

Only flown a few times and flys well

i read the above as its only flown a few times and when it did fly it flew really good, then i crashed it and it no longer flys very well, hence spares or repair.
all planes be they paper,model,or real fly well until they crash

neilmcl

NotRichAtAll wrote: »

i read the above as its only flown a few times and when it did fly it flew really good, then i crashed it and it no longer flys very well, hence spares or repair.
all planes be they paper,model,or real fly well until they crash

I don't know how you can read it as that. It says "it flys well" not "it flew well now it doesn't". Most reasonable people would interpret this as still in working order albeit with signs of use/damage etc.

ThumbRemote

marliepanda wrote: »

Probably nowhere. It was advertised as 'signs of damage' and it's damaged. It was advertised as spares or repair, implying it's only good to repair or strip down to fix other stuff and no good on its own.

bris wrote: »

He stated it was unused for 6 months so sold as spares or repair, you should always head this warning. You thought otherwise thinking it was a bargain and took a gamble.

peachyprice wrote: »

He sold it as showing signs of damage and for 'spares or repair'. That would give a clear indication that he didn't know whether it worked or not. If you wanted a working plane you should have asked further questions.

Can't understand how people can take selective parts of the description and assume that they somehow override anything else that's written.

It may say "spares or repair" - but it goes on to say the reason for this is because it's been sat unused. Not for more fundamental reasons like it's been dropped out of the sky from a great height.

It also says "flys well". Clearly it doesn't.