eBay

sbattle · ‎07-13-2017

Just adding my voice as yet another cautionary tale for other sellers.

I sold a purse for $19 with free shipping. It was new with tags attached, but had very minor scuffs from storage, which I noted.

Buyer received package then claimed purse had other problems that I had not disclosed. Naïvely, I was surprised because I am a careful and responsible seller, and had examined the bag carefully before posting it.

I requested photos of the problems from the buyer; she claimed not to have a camera capable of capturing them. This seemed a bit fishy to me, but to be accommodating, I accepted the return through eBay anyway, and had Ebay email her a return label to be paid by me.

She then claimed to be having problems printing the label. She asked me to help, and I tried, but could not figure out a way to assist her or to send a second label.

Ebay then contacted me to tell me to provide her with a label. This initiated a very frustrating round of emails between me and Ebay, where I explained that I had already provided a label, etc etc. Each eBay response came from a new person who seemed not to understand the situation or to even be reading my emails. Meanwhile, as I reported to eBay during these exchanges, each time I try to pull up the case details, I got an error message.

Then, without responding to my last message at all nor requiring the buyer to return the item, eBay refunded the full purchase price to the buyer, and debited my PayPal account. So I'm out both the item and the money.

I posted this item responsibly, was responsive and helpful to the buyer even though her behavior was questionable, and tried repeatedly at some length to get Ebay to understand and help. At this point I have no idea what I could have done to avoid being shafted this way.

Ebay offered the option of calling them to appeal, but at this point I have already spent more time on an inexpensive item than it's worth, and have no confidence that talking to Ebay would lead to anything other than additional frustration.

Thank goodness I only lost $19. I'm done selling here though. If Ebay can do this to me on this item, they can do it to me on anything I list.

I've had friends tell me that Ebay is unfair to sellers, but I did not fully appreciate how true that is until now.

mustardjo · ‎07-19-2017

Ebay has a record of you sending a label to your buyer. If the buyer didn't use it ...it is not your fault. There is no delivery confirmation on the return so the buyer should not have gotten a refund.

retrose1 · ‎07-19-2017

@sg51 wrote:
I will reiterate something I mentioned in a previous post - this has been our process for years and if anything discussed here has come as a surprise, it is a likely indication of how infrequently this issue arises for our sellers.

If you'd like to create deranged, hostile behavior, use this forumla:
1. Create a draconian punishment. Permaban after a very small number of felony convictions.
2. Make the definition of the felony something which allows for good sellers to randomly get hit out of the blue, while trying to do their best, and thinking they are following the rules.

Here's an example.

While the specifics of how a situation where a label unable to be used is not outlined, it is clearly stated that a seller has to provide return shipping costs when the item does not match the listing description.

Ok. Let's see how clear it is:

If a buyer asks us to step in and help with a return request, either because you didn't respond to a return request by the deadline or you and the buyer can't reach an agreement, we review the request and come to a decision. If we find in favor of the buyer, we refund the buyer directly and recover the amount of the refund from you. That amount includes the cost of the item plus the original cost of shipping. We either ask PayPal to remove the refund amount from your PayPal account, place the amount on your seller invoice or charge your payment method on file. We let you know when we're seeking reimbursement.

So seller agrees to accept the return, and has responded. But wait. Buyer reports that he can't print the label. Please, Trinton. Put yourself in the shoes of a seller who has just this much information. He knows he's likely to be permabanned if he goes wrong here.

How exactly is seller expected to be able to have any idea about what he needs to do, and by when?

What you've done is put a cautious, responsible seller into a position where the only logical choice is a refund with no return required. That will fix the problem safely. That's the ONLY way to guarantee avoiding harsh punishment.

And you've put a naive seller who just trusts "if I'm a good seller, I'll be fine" in great danger. Because that seller sure doesn't see in that policy where he's expected to send cash to buyer by some unknown date. And that good seller could very well tell buyer to take it up with ebay. BOOM

sg, you missed the obvious and most important point.

If you'd like to create deranged, hostile behavior, use this formula: Create an us vs them attitude between buyers and sellers so that they will turn to ebay for help - at that point ebay is in total control and a satisfactory conclusion can not be met because at least one of the participants have no say and so will be not be happy with the outcome.

Once one side is unhappy and feel ripped off, they will tend to view every problem as the potential to be ripped off and react accordingly. Once it becomes clear that the fix is in and the judge will not be fair to one side, then the environment becomes hostile and it becomes us vs them. And soon scammers start taking advantage - BUT since the judge is biased, it becomes impossible for anyone to tell what is a legit problem and what is just a scam. Since one side loses money on a regular basis, they naturally believe that everything is a scam.

I have often said that I believe when ebay says work with your buyer - they really mean refund your buyer. And I firmly believe that these new 'tests', 'glitches', and hidden policies are basically ebay's implementing that policy so that sellers will just give up fighting the inevitable and start refunding buy-uh-scammers without the hassle of the buyer having to return the item for a refund.

Before Donahoe took over ebay I never would have considered using another site, not being afraid of listing high dollar items, and I trusted everyone. Now I have secure better producing businesses on other sites - that I don't have an us vs them attitude on, I won't list something on ebay where I will be out more than $10, and everyone with a problem is a scammer to be protected from.

I understand and can appreciate that ebay is a business that exists to make money. I just wish that ebay understood the same thing about their sellers. We are not just wallets that exist to pay for ebay's magnanimous gestures to keep one group of users happy.

(*Bleep*)

sg51 · ‎07-19-2017

sg, you missed the obvious and most important point.

If you'd like to create deranged, hostile behavior, use this formula: Create an us vs them attitude between buyers and sellers so that they will turn to ebay for help - at that point ebay is in total control and a satisfactory conclusion can not be met because at least one of the participants have no say and so will be not be happy with the outcome.

You definitely have a point, rr, and you'll not see me arguing with you about it.

I'm more accepting of the rigged nature of mail delivery commerce. I'm sympathetic to ebay's stuck in the middle position. I bellieve that most of the "secret policy" business is there to avoid giving scamming buyers a roadmap.

However, I think the current "policy" is sub-optimal, because it sets sellers up for an undeserved unresolved strike. And it convinces sellers that any assertion of "you have to return the stuff to get a refund" is dangerous indeed.

Further, that danger is not only unnecessary, it's not even a tradeoff between ebay and seller protection. Both ebay and seller would do better with a better policy.

The policy would be "followable", in that seller could read the policy, do what it says, and be absolutely protected from an unresolved strike. That doesn't mean seller doesn't have to accept bogus SNAD returns, and all that carp. It also doesn't provide a roadmap to buyer saying "if you follow the implications here, you will see how you will be almost guaranteed a full refund while keeping the stuff". In fact, it makes it clear that in most cases, buyer must return the stuff to get a refund, which discourages bogus SNADs along with simple returns.

The rule on "unable to print label" needs to put the ball into buyer's court, not seller's. Hold seller financially responsible, but not action responsible under threat of felony conviction. Again, that doesn't detract from Ebay's goals at all, and helps seller a lot.

retrose1 · ‎07-19-2017

@sg51 wrote:
sg, you missed the obvious and most important point.

If you'd like to create deranged, hostile behavior, use this formula: Create an us vs them attitude between buyers and sellers so that they will turn to ebay for help - at that point ebay is in total control and a satisfactory conclusion can not be met because at least one of the participants have no say and so will be not be happy with the outcome.

You definitely have a point, rr, and you'll not see me arguing with you about it.

I'm more accepting of the rigged nature of mail delivery commerce. I'm sympathetic to ebay's stuck in the middle position. I bellieve that most of the "secret policy" business is there to avoid giving scamming buyers a roadmap.

However, I think the current "policy" is sub-optimal, because it sets sellers up for an undeserved unresolved strike. And it convinces sellers that any assertion of "you have to return the stuff to get a refund" is dangerous indeed.

Further, that danger is not only unnecessary, it's not even a tradeoff between ebay and seller protection. Both ebay and seller would do better with a better policy.

The policy would be "followable", in that seller could read the policy, do what it says, and be absolutely protected from an unresolved strike. That doesn't mean seller doesn't have to accept bogus SNAD returns, and all that carp. It also doesn't provide a roadmap to buyer saying "if you follow the implications here, you will see how you will be almost guaranteed a full refund while keeping the stuff". In fact, it makes it clear that in most cases, buyer must return the stuff to get a refund, which discourages bogus SNADs along with simple returns.

The rule on "unable to print label" needs to put the ball into buyer's court, not seller's. Hold seller financially responsible, but not action responsible under threat of felony conviction. Again, that doesn't detract from Ebay's goals at all, and helps seller a lot.

The current policy is sub optimal because ebay doesn't follow it, or reinterprets it so that ebay can do whatever it wants. And right now it appears that ebay wants scammy buyers continuing to buy and the sellers paying to be victims from that policy.

Example, scammer buys, gets item, files SNAD claiming the item is different, fake, missing stuff, ect - and the seller can either refund or say return AND pay for the return ship label. When the seller gets back the item stripped of parts, a different item, or whatever you want to call the box of rocks ect - ebay POLICY SAYS that the buyer HAS to ship back the item in the condition it was sent. They didn't and there is nothing that the seller can do to prove it to ebay and so the seller loses and the scammer gets a freebie. OR if the seller has proof they can show to the CS if they are lucky enough to get an appeal - then suddenly the seller has to be a mind reader and prove the intent of the buyer.

Why not state in clear terms the rules for buyers?? By doing so with sellers, the seller upgraded their practices so they are better sellers. If ebay has a published policy that tells potential scammers that they can only get xx number of cases, that will make them choose what to scam - and if ebay want's a hidden policy then they should have a policy that they don't publish that basically says that if a buyer has 2 ids with a total that goes over that number those ids and the buyer themselves are booted. ebay can link sellers multiple ids, they seem to be incapable to do it with buyers though.

That will boot scammers AND make it look like ebay is not 110% buyercentric. Which is the biggest problem now. Right now, I firmly believe that ebay will only find for a seller if the seller manages to get attention drawn to their problem specifically. That every other problem involving a buyer and a seller outside of INR will be found for the buyer.

(*Bleep*)

sg51 · ‎07-19-2017

ebay can link sellers multiple ids, they seem to be incapable to do it with buyers though.

Ok. You work on that problem. I'll see if I can be pursuasive regarding a procedure which guarantees avoidance of unresolved strikes.

They're complimentary goals.

retrose1 · ‎07-19-2017

@sg51 wrote:
ebay can link sellers multiple ids, they seem to be incapable to do it with buyers though.

Ok. You work on that problem. I'll see if I can be pursuasive regarding a procedure which guarantees avoidance of unresolved strikes.

They're complimentary goals.

That is easy - automatically refund your buyer for any complaint within minutes of their making it.

ebay has made it perfectly clear that if a seller does that, they will never get an unresolved strike. Because refunding a scammer is resolving the problem.

(*Bleep*)

isamerjam · ‎07-19-2017

I kind of suspect that I may be being scammed on a return. I'll have to wait and see what happens. I keep some items in stock and I use a multichannel fullfilment center for some other items. I had a buyer buy some shampoo from me; Herbal Essences with Violet. She requested a return claiming that I sent the wrong one. She says that I sent the newer version with Mangosteen. Thing is, I don't even carry that but it is one of the items at the fullfilment center, so I don't know if a worker grabbed someone elses product stored next to mine, or if she is lying. I kind of suspect that she could be trying to scam me but it is possible she's being truthful. I accepted the return, paid $4.11 for a return label, and she has until the 25th to send it back to me. Reading your account and some other people's accounts has me wondering. I have been kind of sold on their seller protections but a lot of people on these forums say that eBay is bad to sellers and good to buyers. I have been a buyer here for a while but only recently began selling. I wish you the best of success on whichever other platforms you use.

missjen831 · ‎07-19-2017

@retrose1 wrote:
@sg51 wrote:
ebay can link sellers multiple ids, they seem to be incapable to do it with buyers though.

Ok. You work on that problem. I'll see if I can be pursuasive regarding a procedure which guarantees avoidance of unresolved strikes.

They're complimentary goals.
That is easy - automatically refund your buyer for any complaint within minutes of their making it.

ebay has made it perfectly clear that if a seller does that, they will never get an unresolved strike. Because refunding a scammer is resolving the problem.

For some time eBay has made it clear that their mentality is that what the buyer wants, the buyer gets! This is why sellers are forced to accept false SNADs and issue full refunds when the buyer sends back a brick. Ebay expects the seller to take care of the buyer no matter what. That's why it's the sellers problem when the buyer can't print an eBay-issued label. When sellers first became required to pay for return shipping and sellers were initially opting to have the buyer pay for it and then reimburse them (when no one was quite sure how to send a label), ebays position was that the seller is expected to reimburse the buyer period. If the seller shipped the item for $6 in a flat rate envelope and the buyer shipped it overnight for $80 since the seller was footing the bill, eBay fully expected the seller to reimburse the $80!

and they've created an environment where buyers expect a refund without returning the item! Just the other day I responded to a buyer who bought used books from one of the mega book sellers. The buyer wanted his money back AND to keep the books because they weren't in as good of condition as he expected. The seller said return for a refund.And he said straight up--I've bought from this seller before and gotten my money back without returning the books and I'd like for that to happen now. What are the chances of that happening if I ask eBay to step in?

It wouldn't surprise me if eBay makes a major change and gives buyers full control (not that they don't already have control!) right now the seller gets to decide if they want to require a return or issue a refund w/o a return. That will change and If the buyer wants a refund and to keep the item, that's what the buyer will get. The seller will have no choice.

One life is all we have to live
Love is all we have to give

**Formerly known as MissJen316**

retrose1 · ‎07-19-2017

It wouldn't surprise me if eBay makes a major change and gives buyers full control (not that they don't already have control!) right now the seller gets to decide if they want to require a return or issue a refund w/o a return. That will change and If the buyer wants a refund and to keep the item, that's what the buyer will get. The seller will have no choice.

What do you think 'hidden policies' are for? And some of the reported happenings that are just 'tests' or 'glitches'.

I figure that in a year or two ebay will just roll out a gimmie my money back button and that will be the end of confusing policies and quality high dollar merchandise on ebay.

(*Bleep*)

bigmotormania · ‎07-19-2017

@retrose1 wrote:

It wouldn't surprise me if eBay makes a major change and gives buyers full control (not that they don't already have control!) right now the seller gets to decide if they want to require a return or issue a refund w/o a return. That will change and If the buyer wants a refund and to keep the item, that's what the buyer will get. The seller will have no choice.

What do you think 'hidden policies' are for? And some of the reported happenings that are just 'tests' or 'glitches'.

I figure that in a year or two ebay will just roll out a gimmie my money back button and that will be the end of confusing policies and quality high dollar merchandise on ebay.

No need for policy when it's as simple as *click* Automatic Refund, no questions asked.

Bigmotormania

moto-science · ‎07-19-2017

Adding to the seller's punishment.......even if the seller's fixes the problem,

the buyer leaves his request open and doesn't close his request....

Seller's money is held up ~60 days have passed.

Ebay consistently delivers bad experiences for sellers.

They fail and continue to fail to understand that sellers experience is important.

We are customers too.....not soylent green for Ebay.

mam98031 · ‎07-19-2017

@moto-science

the buyer leaves his request open and doesn't close his request....

Seller's money is held up ~60 days have passed.

The Request should auto close after 30 days. If it doesn't, then you may need to call Ebay. Once the Request is closed, your money should also be released.

mam98031 • Volunteer Community Member • Buyer/Seller since 1999

tunicaslot · ‎07-20-2017

Not every buyer is a scammer - despite what many on these boards say. You don't have control of your product - someone else is packaging your items and sending them out. Even if you did have control - we're human and we all make mistakes.

You should always be aware of what to look for when it comes to scammers - but to have the outlook that everyone is out to scam you only hurts yourself. Too many people here buy into this fallacy that every buyer is a scammer that asks a question or requests a return. I get sick of pointing out to them - why the question asked is something they haven't addressed in the listing or why a return may be necessary. And the next time we go through the same thing because they have the I'm being scammed mentality from these boards.

llllady · ‎07-20-2017

@tunicaslot wrote:
Not every buyer is a scammer - despite what many on these boards say. You don't have control of your product - someone else is packaging your items and sending them out. Even if you did have control - we're human and we all make mistakes.

You should always be aware of what to look for when it comes to scammers - but to have the outlook that everyone is out to scam you only hurts yourself. Too many people here buy into this fallacy that every buyer is a scammer that asks a question or requests a return. I get sick of pointing out to them - why the question asked is something they haven't addressed in the listing or why a return may be necessary. And the next time we go through the same thing because they have the I'm being scammed mentality from these boards.

When giving advice and opinions on this board, those on the receiving end of that advice/opinion have a right to take it or not take it. Smart people listen to all the advice and opinions and then make the decision that THEY deem is best for THEM.

“It took me quite a long time to develop a voice, and now that I have it, I am not going to be silent” ― Madeleine K. Albright

Great! 45.8% down over the same time last year with 2x+ items listed. Are you impressed? I'm certainly not!