Locked
Discussions in this board are limited to the original poster and Community Mentors
Regarding penalties imposed on me for non-payment to an illicit seller
Summary: shina-17586 recounted a transaction cancellation due to non-payment after winning an item from a seller suspected of shill bidding. Despite their efforts to report the illicit activities to eBay, they received no response and expressed concern over a non-payment record on their account. mr_lincoln, evry1nositswindy, and eburtonlab provided guidance, emphasizing the difficulty in proving shill bidding and the implications of unpaid item strikes. Although some responses suggested various possibilities for the bidding behavior, shina-17586 argued for more rigorous account creation processes on eBay to prevent manipulation of market prices, stressing the importance of assessing probability in such scenarios.
A transaction was cancelled due to non-payment for an item I had mistakenly won from an illegal seller who repeatedly engages in shill bidding using fake accounts. I have been reporting the illicit nature of this seller's activities to eBay in detail for the past week, yet I have received no response. I am aware that this cancellation has resulted in a record of non-payment due to buyer fault on my account; I find this situation completely unacceptable and want eBay to take appropriate corrective action. I would appreciate your advice on this matter.
shina-17586
OP1 week agoThank you very much for your kind advice.
Over the past 40 days, this seller has listed the exact same card—of which just over 100 exist worldwide—on six separate occasions. In four of these instances, bidding wars broke out between multiple accounts with zero feedback, with one of those accounts ultimately winning the auction. In the remaining two cases (including the one I won), accounts with zero feedback also placed bids and drove up the price. I surmise that the seller used only two distinct card images across these six listings and likely held an inventory of only two cards. Furthermore, since I confronted the seller a week ago regarding suspected shill bidding, all the zero-feedback accounts involved have been closed; only two had been closed prior to my inquiry, while the remaining eight were shut down within this past week.
Additionally, there are clear indications that bots were used in the bidding wars involving these zero-feedback accounts.
eburtonlab
Mentor1 week agoFurthermore, since I confronted the seller a week ago regarding suspected shill bidding, all the zero-feedback accounts involved have been closed; only two had been closed prior to my inquiry, while the remaining eight were shut down within this past week.
If eBay had caught the seller shill bidding, it is the seller's account that would have been closed rather than just the bidder accounts.
It is not uncommon for sellers to relist an auction if a winner does not pay. That is not suspicious behavior on the part of the seller.
While it is possible that the seller was using some zero feedback accounts to submit bids on the seller's own auctions, it is also possible that someone else was using those zero feedback accounts to harass the seller by bidding up the seller's auctions, and then either retracting high bids or else winning and not paying, prompting the seller to block or report the bidder accounts, possibly contributing to or leading to eBay suspending those accounts, or to the account owner closing them voluntarily.
shina-17586
OP1 week agoDear eburtonlab
Thank you for your comment.
Please forgive my impertinence in expressing my own views, given that I had originally sought your advice.
It strikes me that your comment merely lists every conceivable possibility. While I understand you are cautioning against jumping to conclusions, I believe that when dealing with uncertain events, the crucial factor is determining the likelihood—or probability—associated with each of those potential scenarios. What possible benefit could a buyer derive from repeatedly engaging in a harassment tactic—four times in a row—where they place competitive bids using multiple accounts with zero feedback, win the auction, and then fail to complete the payment? Does a seller really exist who would incur such intense animosity? It sounds as though you are arguing that, provided there is even the slightest chance that shill bidding did not occur, the winning bidder is invariably obligated to complete the transaction. Are we expected to simply accept the consequences as our own responsibility if we discover suspicious bidding history only after winning the auction? Can such a practice truly be considered fair dealing between a seller and a buyer?
myangelandmyprincess
Mentor1 week agoThere are bidders who will just bid for sport with no intention to pay. There are bidders who will bid more in the heat of the moment and not pay because the price is too high. And in competition categories which I will argue trading cards is one you could have someone trying to hurt the competition. With the information provided it can't be determined that it was shill bidding and not one of these other situations. With the accounts being removed and the seller account not it being one of these other situations is a logical option.
shina-17586
OP6 days agoDear myangelandmyrincess
Thank you for your comment.
Based on the message I sent to the seller regarding market manipulation, I speculated that the seller might have closed the shill bidding accounts themselves.
I also considered it highly likely that, given the massive volume of transactions eBay handles, the company might have failed to detect this specific incident, allowing the seller to escape without any penalty.
Since I do not know what resources eBay's compliance department has at its disposal for rapid response, I cannot rule out the possibility that I am drawing a conclusion that simply suits my own perspective.
At the same time, regarding this card—a top-tier insert found in high-end boxes—there have been only a little over a dozen recorded transactions on eBay in the three months since its release. Given that six transactions—inflated by shill bidding or prank bids—have had a massive impact on the formation of the card's market price, I believe eBay needs to implement stricter procedures for account creation.
myangelandmyprincess
Mentor6 days agoThe seller wouldn't be able to immediately close the accounts. It takes a minimum of 14 days to close an account and that is when there are no recent transactions or activity. Accounts that were bidding or winning would likely take longer for the account owner to just close them. Which is why the idea eBay may have closed them is being mentioned.
eburtonlab
Mentor1 week ago · Edited@inasen-37
Unpaid item cancellations can cause your account to be blocked from bidding or buying by many sellers, so I would advise you to pay for any bids or purchases you initiate if you want to avoid unpaid item strikes.
Sellers can choose to block users with two or more unpaid item strikes within a year, so when you have gone at least a year without two unpaid item strikes, you should be able to buy from most sellers again. Some sellers may only block buyers for unpaid items strikes in the last month or the last six months, rather than a year, and some may not block such users at all, so you may still have some buying options even now.
Being overly concerned about shill bidding is often a sign that a bidder is bidding too early, leaving a bid exposed for too long. Not every bid that appears to be a shill bid may actually be a shill bid, though. There are many more bidders bidding in a manner that invites suspicion than there are sellers actually willing to risk losing an experienced selling account by engaging in shill bidding. Any competing bid could potentially look like a shill bid to another bidder; even your own bid.
By deciding in advance the maximum you are willing to pay, taking into consideration shipping and taxes, and then bidding that amount once, as late in the auction as you can comfortably do so without risking missing the end of the auction, you can minimize the opportunity for sport bidders, nibble bidders or shill bidders to bid against you to run your bid up, outbid you to determine your maximum bid amount, or to retract and rebid leaving you to pay your maximum amount.
evry1nositswindy
Mentor1 week agoThey will not reverse the non-payment strike. Shill bidding is taken very seriously by eBay and sellers can lose their seller accounts due to this behavior. You really don't have proof of shill bidding; it is just your opinion. Two strikes will keep you from bidding/making offers for a year. One strike in a year won't harm your account and you can still bid and make offers.
mr_lincoln
Mentor1 week ago · EditedHi @inasen-37
-First: proving that shill bidding occurred is a challenge. If you think it happened reach out to eBay's Trust and Safety Department and ask if the eBay IDs involved are "associated" (connected in some way by name, address, IP address accessing eBay, etc.). For security reasons they can only say yes or no but not give details. They may take action if they find what you are saying is true.
-Next: We are volunteer Buyers and Sellers here with no account access. But as it relates to your UPI (Unpaid item) strike then that falls on you if you did not pay. You bid an amount on the auction and won it for a price you were willing to pay even if it was your max bid placed sometime before the auction ended. That is all eBay sees as well as the Seller.
-Were there any bid retractions on that auction? If so and you were outbid then a bid over you was retracted then that might help you in your case for shill bidding.
-If you only get 1 UPI strike in 12 months it will NOT affect your bidding or buying. If you get 2 then it will. eBay's lowest block number (and the default on Selling accounts) is 2 in 12 months.
-You can try appealing a decision on this ebay help page (if you haven;t already done so): Appeal the outcome of a case as a buyer | eBay