Negative Feedback Option Should be Given to Sellers, for Buyers That Don't Pay for Auctions?

[fairdeal*lb]

eBay can make it available, only for this reason? Maybe even some type of auto NF to the buyer from eBay? 

Your thoughts? 

[luckythewinner]

---

@fairdeal*lb wrote:

eBay can make it available, only for this reason? Maybe even some type of auto NF to the buyer from eBay? Your thoughts? 

---

My thoughts? Some behavior by sellers makes non-payment justified. 

Examples: 

• Seller discloses damage not in the listing after the sale
• Seller discloses a mistake in the listing after the sale
• Seller admits he is not sure it is authentic after the sale
• Seller refuses to honor a combined shipping deal negotiated before the sale
• Seller says he is going to change the shipping carrier offered in the listing
• Seller is abusive, rude, or non-responsive

[fairdeal*lb]

---

@luckythewinner wrote:

---

@fairdeal*lb wrote:

eBay can make it available, only for this reason? Maybe even some type of auto NF to the buyer from eBay? Your thoughts? 

---

My thoughts? Some behavior by sellers makes non-payment justified. 

Examples: 

• Seller discloses damage not in the listing after the sale
• Seller discloses a mistake in the listing after the sale
• Seller admits he is not sure it is authentic after the sale
• Seller refuses to honor a combined shipping deal negotiated before the sale
• Seller says he is going to change the shipping carrier offered in the listing
• Seller is abusive, rude, or non-responsive

---

Yes of course, the buyer can appeal if any of those factor in.  

[mtgraves7984]

Your thoughts?

@fairdeal*lb 

I'd rather have my money. I could care less what (a transaction's) feedback says... I'm over it by then. But that's just me...

[lotzofuniquegoodies]

---

@fairdeal*lb wrote:

eBay can make it available, only for this reason? Maybe even some type of auto NF to the buyer from eBay? 

Your thoughts? 

---

The bizarro part of all this (re: non paying buyers) is eBay sending reminder(s) to sellers to leave feedback for these characters.  Sorry but awesome transaction would be very misleading!! As of late, starting to believe they are not paying because they never bothered to either look at or consider shipping was a cost they were responsible for. The decent thing to have done would have been letting the seller know why they've decided to back out vs a seller trying to guess. (In majority of cases there is zippo in the way of an explanation.)

-Lotz

[fairdeal*lb]

---

@mtgraves7984 wrote:

Your thoughts?

@fairdeal*lb 

I'd rather have my money. I could care less what (a transaction's) feedback says... I'm over it by then. But that's just me...

---

It leads me to the real benefit to fellow sellers, in that they can screen a buyers NF for non-pmt. There should also be the option to remove said buyer from your auction.     

[maxine*j]

Why?  Who cares about a buyer's feedback?  They pay, you ship.  If they don't pay, file non-paying bidder,  as most sellers block those with two NPs or more.

-

[krazzykats]

No public naming and shaming.  Feedback is public, so this wouldn't work.  

[rugerskick]

It seems fair considering the buyer can leave negative feedback.  Only one side can express negatives of a transaction that both are involved in?  The other has their hand tied behind their back and censored?  It would be fair to be able to leave a more accurate feedback of a buyer transaction.

For every argument as to why a buyer should be able to leave negative feedback, there's a counter-argument for sellers being able to leave negative feedback.

It's unequal treatment.   It allows ebay to not have to go after problem buyers.  No evidence.  They don't want to have visible evidence about buyers, just sellers.  They only want to be able to openly deal with sellers, not buyers.  It is about really only punishing or penalizing one side of the transaction.  Only the seller is ever held to the legality of the contract.  Buyers are legally obligated to purchase an item but they routinely do not pay and there is no negative consequences for them.  Worst case is they might have to start a new account and continue on as normal.

[fairdeal*lb]

---

@krazzykats wrote:

No public naming and shaming.  Feedback is public, so this wouldn't work.  

---

Only when rolls are reversed, the buyer can?

It would only present the facts of non-pmt..    

[fairdeal*lb]

---

@maxine*j wrote:

Why?  Who cares about a buyer's feedback?  They pay, you ship.  If they don't pay, file non-paying bidder,  as most sellers block those with two NPs or more.

-

---

I just believe this method would be better, it could work in conjunction with the two NPs block.   

From earlier: It leads me to the real benefit to fellow sellers, in that they can screen a buyers NF for non-pmt. There should also be the option to remove said buyer from your auction.

[maxine*j]

---

@rugerskick wrote:

It seems fair considering the buyer can leave negative feedback...  It's unequal treatment...

---

But it has always been thus in the retail trade.  The buyer may not always be right, but the buyer is always treated  as though he were right.

You don't go into a store and see someone with a "LOUSY CUSTOMER" sign pinned to his back, or hear an announcement that there's a "BAD CUSTOMER IN AISLE NINE!" or hear a clerk say to everyone else in line, "THIS CUSTOMER IS TERRIBLE!" 

It just does not work that way.  As for these on-line disputes, eBay has no way to investigate most claims, so it's the buyer's word against the seller's word and, again as is normal in retail, eBay takes the customer's word.

eBay ought to do away with the whole, outdated thing, which it came up with when e-commerce was brand new and was, among other things, also about the first form of social media.

-

[krazzykats]

eBay originally started where anyone could leave feedback for anyone, even without a transaction.

Then it became an "equivalent retaliation".  Buyers left a negative comment, and the seller retaliated in kind, or the seller left a negative and the buyer retaliated.

[pburn]

---

@rugerskick wrote:

For every argument as to why a buyer should be able to leave negative feedback, there's a counter-argument for sellers being able to leave negative feedback.

---

Except for this one: I would never purchase from a seller who publicly shamed a buyer. Never.

Buyers who don't pay already receive a strike on their account for nonpayment. Anything more than that looks like piling on or schadenfreude. It's unprofessional and unseemly. 

eBay sellers, whether they understand this or not, are supposed to be business people. Buyers are not. What kind of business person insults its customers with negative feedback.

This topic has been argued back and forth since 2008. I doubt if anyone is going to change their opinion from participation in yet another thread on the same topic. I know for sure eBay is not going to change their policy, so why go over it yet again?

If sellers are having trouble with nonpayment issues, there are ways to minimize or eliminate unpaid transactions. Can sellers not just use all the tools eBay already gives them? Do they really need to stoop so low as to want to include negative feedback?

@fairdeal*lb 

Here's some standard advice to eliminate unpaid transactions. They're much more effective than leaving negative feedback.

• List all items as fixed-price, immediate payment required. Do not list with the auction format.
• Remove the "best offer" option from your listings or decline each offer manually--no matter how tempting it appears.
• Make sure to use the new cancellation process for members who don't pay within four full days (cancel on day five). A strike for nonpayment will be recorded on their account. The cancellation process can be done manually or you can set it to cancel for you automatically.
• Set your Buyer Requirements to block any member with two or more strikes in the last twelve months--the most restrictive setting.
• Add the member id to your Blocked Buyer List.

[fairdeal*lb]

---

@krazzykats wrote:

eBay originally started where anyone could leave feedback for anyone, even without a transaction.

Then it became an "equivalent retaliation".  Buyers left a negative comment, and the seller retaliated in kind, or the seller left a negative and the buyer retaliated.

---

Easy, a buyer couldn't retaliate for NP-FB. Unless they win an appeal which removes there own NP-FB.