Unofficial discussion RE: Suggestions that may be helpful for disputes/chargebacks
Since the pinned post on handling disputes and chargebacks can't be responded to, I'm creating an unofficial discussion thread for it.
@kyle@ebay It would help sellers be more successful with disputes and chargebacks if sellers could submit something like a PDF as a response. Only allowing 1 photo for the response is extremely limiting. Forcing sellers to edit an image as a makeshift response including a letter is really strange in 2023.
17 comments
anasazirose
·3 years agoFrom what I've read on ebay regarding chargebacks, the CC companies just don't care. They do the bidding of their customer. In this regard, ebay doesn't do enough for THEIR customers, the sellers.
When an ebay rep tells a seller, "I see you're right, but my hands are tied", that's not going to bat for the seller. Ebay's new EIS covers sellers once a package arrives at the shipping center. The seller doesn't lose the sale. They currently have a $2500 limit on shipped goods per transaction that they're willing to cover. Maybe they could make a policy protecting sellers, especially the ones who have 'won' their case with ebay and then the buyer does a chargeback.
I suggested this on another thread, and the main concern seemed to be ebay passing the cost on to sellers. Is ebay passing the cost of covering EIS shipments on to sellers?
It's been suggested that sellers put a percentage of each sale away as 'insurance' against a chargeback. I've also seen a recent post where a seller sold a $100 item and after fees and shipping and promoted fees, they had $30. Maybe ebay could actually 'get in the ring' for the sellers, and be the ones to put away that percentage out of their profit to help sellers. Maybe they could stop the cut and dry attitude towards chargebacks which are too similar to the cut and dry INADs.
100 chargebacks to ebay aren't as devastating as one chargeback to a seller.
kyle@ebay
Hey @michigancolor that's a great suggestion! It's been brought up in a few other threads as well, so rest assured that we are passing this along and your voices are being heard!
inhawaii
·3 years agoHere is my "official" opinion on this "unofficial" thread.
I couldn't help but think...
A) There really is no way to defend against a NAD case.
You can have all the evidence/pictures/video in the world.
If the buyer orders a red widget and was expecting a blue one,
as long as they check that "not as described" box ebay will side with item.
B) Thank God I haven't been subjected to one yet but based on what i've read here on the boards, it's almost impossible to win a chargeback dispute, no matter how ridiculous it is.
retro_entertainment_collectibles
·3 years agoIts not any fun dealing with CB's in online sales even with one own merchant account.
I remember this one lady, oh my gosh.
Back in the day we were an authorized Microsoft software reseller. We generally dealt in delisted titlesas Windows and Office, MS Access, Excel etc. trying sell legit editions online was rather difficult as so many pirated copies from China and Mexico were all over the place.
Back then Microsoft had retail stores and also discounted titles for MS employee's so they had Employee editions, same stuff, exactly short of a sticker on it. If you happen walk into a MS Store, show you're employee card, get you're discount and they slap a sticker on it. Anyways, as titles delisted (no longer current or packaging change) we could pick that stuff for usually about 75% off retail, they have us sell it online in our storefronts or some of the former B2C auction sites like we were authorized ok for Onsale, iDeal, uBid.
Microsoft via Consolidated Freight sent us a mixed pallet of all these "Magic School Bus" large boxed titles. So we've all these mastercases and opening em' some had no "Employee" sticker on them, some did, MS care less of course, delisted. Just like might get mastercase of some video game that had a promotional flap on it for whatever, 25% off some coming game title... Obviously once delisted won't be honored regardless of expirer dates (We'd actually remove them cuz' we get barked at by the publishers back in the day as people want redeem em').
So anyways this lady buys up a copy of each Magic School Bus title. Right? Turns out she's a librarian at a school district and the district paid for the stuff. I don't recall but like half what we sent had the Employee sticker on em'. OH MY GOSH what a nightmare. Try explain ALL OF THE ABOVE to the woman... Phhht. They want put the stuff in their library and dont like the Employee sticker and BELIEVE ME they are an absolute nightmare to try get off. You could sink the entire box in a gallon of Goo Gone and whilst the box may disintegrate that label IS NOT COMING OFF. Never saw anything like it, you could patch a submarine with these things.
Bam, next thing we know there's chargeback, Bam $50 gone plus the total of the charge, ain't no partial chargebacks. So librarian wants ship back the ones with the sticker yet CB is against the entire order. Going back and forth and ya' need keep the merchant account provider in the loop see? $25 Cha Ching, $25 Cha Ching, $25 Cha Ching.
Finally we end up dealing with School Principal and I'm trying explain all the above to him. I was like "What in hoots half acre is teaching our kids?" Like what do I need do fly half way across the country to have a sit down to explain an ever so simply concept of employee discount vs delist etc? Oh I was FUMING.
So they ship the entire order back... Ok. We were up to like $175 in fee's responding again and again to the CB, I mean like WHAT MORE DETAIL CAN WE SAY IN THE NEXT ROUND! "Cardboard is paper!"
So dont they call Microsoft who tries explain it as well (or so I was told!). Nope, made no headway there. Microsoft told them they are re-releasing the entire Magic School Bus line in Jewel Case. Nope, the school wants boxes. Welp Microsoft delisted the boxes, cant buy them from Microsoft and they get told we're an authorized Microsoft dealer. Guess what? Doesn't the order come in again? Yep. But from a different venue we sold through. Happy daze!
So I call the Principal and TRY explain THAT. What fun!
So THEN they decide they WANT the order and will just use a black marker to cover up the "Employee sticker." It's rocket science 101!
Now I didn't want send em' anything, "Ye' ole' reserve the right to do business!"
YES!!!!
NO! LOL.
I think it was iDeal, might have been Onsale tells me "Nope! You have to do it!"
And there you have it... I dont know we lost like $125 thereabouts on the order, who knows how many hours trying educate the "educators." The hours trying think of anything more to reply to their constant accusations through the chargeback whilst counting the number of meals that won't be on the table due to the $25 slaps in the puss over and over.
It was kRaZY but not the only one.
retro_entertainment_collectibles
·3 years agoThere is no concrete way defend against chargebacks when a seller is truly not at fault. Normal merchant account responding to chargebacks can be quite expensive as some operations charge per response, nominally $25 bucks.
I'd suspect different between this, those and PayPal revolve around seller record. If you've a merchant account there is a record there in the banking system, aggregate processor of your performance and risk assessments. With PayPal everyone seller/buyer had their own account and thus PayPal again had a performance record(s) and were directly connected and/or the aggregate processor. Aka: You may get a merchant account via someplace but the actual processor lets say is Wells Fargo.
Here the new processor we've no account affording us contact and its unlikely they store any or perhaps a minimal performance more or less risk assessment database of sellers. It's extremely difficult to defend against chargebacks when a seller has no information on the details of how the process ensues.
For example once upon a time I'd a merchant account with EMS Systems, Wells Fargo was the actual processor. We'd had to use PC Software as an Internet Op that leased at $1400 annually. Chargebacks would come, instantly cost $50, $25 to EMS, $25 from Chase (our bank) for reserving the funds on hold, even if the charge was $1. Every response to the chargeback cost $25 and EMS had the software to submit that into Wells. We switched to Card Service International as any chargeback tended to be $100-$150 bucks to settle w/ EMS no matter the purchase amount and marks on you're merchant account can raise the fee's or even loss of card processing via the actual franchises (Visa... Amex etc). As long as we responded to chargebacks through Card Services Web Portal there was no $25 fee per response. But the process clearly laid out in the half gazillion page contractual requirements.
Here if I look online at a purchase its: Direct Withdrawal, Ebay Comuzkkrclppayments for example.
eBay is the merchant of note and as such eBay is the only entity that can respond to chargeback yet they are not the provider of merchandise. Very similar to when we used a company that made all sorts of CDROMS out of public information(s), Maps, history of this and that. They drop ship for us and due to that it was impossible to win a chargeback as we never had any custody of what was sent out to a customer and tracking show that.
Now that all said, our merchant accounts providers in the day, EMS/Card Service could care less about where we sold anything. Amazon, Onsale, Webstore(s) or even in the front yard, they care about making their commissions, monies and PROCESS. There were definitions thereof, Retail, Mail Order, Internet, Restaurant etc. and some of these could be combined. For example, in a retail store with a swipe terminal you don't type in credit card numbers from web orders. You could have a different setup, requires a computer and the software to process or in the case of Card Service, could do so direct via their web portal. Different requirements and PROCESS in transaction disputes etc etc.
Nobody knows process here but one thing we can see in the forums are more people being "scammed" as sellers like call it and that will have direct correlation to process, process that is mostly out of eBay's control. It was out of eBay's control with PayPal as well but sellers had direct access to mitigate problems.
For example, we'd had times when people claim something not work or isn't new and so we often given the option especially with Card Service to "Send another out" and expect the return of the unit sent. We'd still get slammed with the minimum $50 cost of any chargeback, again, thats Process.
Card processors and everyone between make money coming and going, fact. The only time they spill their marbles is when there's a large breach of card security someplace. For example, back in the day my brilliant other half (Politician) and I sat down inventing a way to completely do away with stolen cards being used online. I wrote the software demo, basically pretty easy. Person buys and then via the cardholders bank a handshake occurs. Code sent from the seller operation along w/ the transaction that the customer simply need validate via an ATM, online banking, in person etc. or even bank issues code whereby the buyer retrieve it at ATM, online banking, in person and enter said code into say Amazon's order, handshake. Done.
You'd think we were trying sell snow to Eskimo's, every card franchise, Visa, MC, Discover, Amex none of them showed the LEAST bit of interest. They make money coming and goin', chargebacks come in, $50+, $50+, $50+... They're not out a red cent.
None of the matters are of eBay's fault but that said IMHO they ought seek a way to get PayPal back as a sales option assuming that PayPal didn't "Horse" eBay due to too many problems. In other words, it may well have been PayPal that said, "Well, been fun but we're heading a different direction" for whatever the reasons.
nh7235
·3 years agoeBay is not the merchant of note.
When a buyer files a chargeback, PayPal or Adyen is the only entity that can respond to the chargeback.
1. The purchase amount goes to Adyen (directly at eBay Checkout) or PayPal (when PayPal is selected at eBay Checkout).
2. PayPal or Adyen takes a cut @retro_entertainment_collectibles and puts the remainder in the eBay account.
3. Finally, eBay deducts FVF and fees, and pays the seller.
eBay is not the merchant of note.
retro_entertainment_collectibles
·3 years agoYes, Adyen processes the payment as would PayPal but PayPal be different as PayPal can draw off checking, a credit or debit card. So you're bank statement when paying via PayPal the statement will read PAYPAL and perhaps some information as to the eBay item number behind it.
In as far as my bank (Key) I've been told first named in transactions is the Merchant Account Holder of note. Just as when I'd a merchant account.
Tmobile, Kwik Fill, Applebee's, Amazon and yes eBay are all on my current statement. Ayden is the processor, the merchant account holder is eBay. First time I saw it I was confused by the gibberish "Ebay Comuzkkrclppayments" (that's a cut n paste). Key card services told me the gibberish is basically an reference to the seller, but the merchant account is that of eBay, if it were Adyen then that would be in its place. Adyen is the card processor, eBay the merchant account holder in common terms. I'm sure behind doors its a bit more complex in that of the contract between the two entities.
I wonder what shows in statement/documentation when a consumer Chargeback happens, that is to say on the consumer side. Dollars to donuts it says eBay.
dbfolks166mt
·3 years agoI wonder what shows in statement/documentation when a consumer Chargeback happens, that is to say on the consumer side. Dollars to donuts it says eBay.
From the CC companies perspective eBay is the merchant of record. Adyen is simply a financial processor. It's the same reason your 1099 from eBay shows eBay as the filer and not Adyen.
isaiah53-57
·3 years agoI cant stand it when I see this statement in posts - How is it so easy to give the site a free pass when it seems more than evident their mode of operation and policies are directly responsible for the amount of fraudulent transactions and chargebacks...
Since the site now puts the onus and responsibility for fraudulent transactions completely on the seller, it gives them no incentive to crackdown on buyer fraud... Its similar to what you ran into when you came up with a remedy and offering to money/card processors for stolen card usage which culminated in a dead end for your idea - hence your statement: "You'd think we were trying sell snow to Eskimo's, every card franchise, Visa, MC, Discover, Amex none of them showed the LEAST bit of interest. They make money coming and goin', chargebacks come in, $50+, $50+, $50+... They're not out a red cent.
In my opinion, if this site were to crackdown on buyer fraud, the result would be devastating to them - If the problem is as bad as I believe it is, It would show just how rampant buyer fraud truly is and would culminate in an unprecedented loss of revenue and user accounts that would expose why they chose not to do anything about it in the first place. Basically my theory postulates they have no reason to crackdown on buyer fraud as anything they may lose is likely paltry compared to what they would lose if they did.
So from past experience in dealing with fraud and the company's unwillingness to get rid of at least one known fraudster that had complaints/reports filed from many sellers, and a feedback history stretching out over a year full of false positives, I would say that is is completely wrong to say, "none of the matters are of ebays fault".
retro_entertainment_collectibles
·3 years agoAppreciate you're thoughts. I've elder statesman software and games generally to sell. Back in the day probably the 4th largest delist PC software vendor on the Net.
I'll cite you another example. We had a fella come in for days and days to the webstore ordering hundreds of dollars of titles each day w/ different card each time. Every single transaction went through w/o Address and Zip + 5 validation AVS validation. Maybe different now, but US merchant processors no way validate international orders. Every order no matter domestic or international, AVS failure other than Address & Zip +5 or Zip+9 pay extra for if one choose capture it. So if address pass zip not, pay more, zip validates, address not, pay more, both fail pay even more on the transaction to the processor (Wells Fargo when the above happened).
So we call merchant account provider, "Seems suspicious" they tell us then reverse the charges or dont. They could care less. My ex the politician get on the phone to Visa/MC Corporate Risk Assessment as she expects they are all stolen cards. Get told same story, she wanted FAX all the info, they didn't want it. Could care less. So, we reverse the charges and get transactions are of course gone.
Walmart and Amazon BOTH do their own card processing and there's good reason not only in fee's but risk management/assessment.
eBay doesn't have that option, they're not a retailer. Their are scammers on all sides of the fence not just buyers. The FTC claims in consumer complaints in 2022 millions of them filed totaling a whopping 8.8 billion consumer dollars and granted that's not simply hard goods commerce.
New sellers w/ expensive items are targeted apparently by scammers be they new registered users or not. New users target any seller, trying track by things like IP address useless these days as one can use a proxy. Place like say Nord VPN has thousands and thousands of proxy servers. So new user's cant buy?
I'm sure eBay removes chronic buyers and sellers but they just keep pouring in. This is why I've suggested numerous times a different public facing metrics system. But I'm certain as to how they implement certain assets of that legally, what can be front facing and not. eBay looses good sellers due to bad buyers, eBay looses good buyers due to bad sellers and we've not even breached product that shouldn't even be being sold. There's been pressure on eBay and Amazon for over 20 years about whats sold and by whom, part of the reason FBA exists at Amazon. I know several sellers who were because of claims (false claims might I add) that they either ship by FBA or they're done and its considerably more expensive.
Might eBay do that? Everything gets sent to eBay to warehouse except they can't afford the automation that Amazon has built over quite a long time. I've said this before, comparing Amazon or Walmart to eBay is apples and oranges, they are 300+ Billion dollar annual revenue operations as comparted to one under 10 Billion and Walmart IS the comer sights set on Amazon and no doubt causing residual damages here.
I appreciate you're comments but the question becomes how can eBay defend against bad buyers, bad sellers and illegitimate product not being a card processor. I've suggested new front facing metrics, Sellers show good/bad/return transactions. Buyers show good/bad/return/NAD claims/INR claims/CB's etc as counts. Buyers and sellers can filter based on those metrics and the place become safer by raising the bar on both sides of transactions. In time PERHAPS that bubble outward getting rid of problematic folks.
That all said, I'm not certain it's not already too late. That is to say legislatively the powers that be want regulate the soul right out of third party commerce. For example, The Shop Safe Act in at least it's original form wants hold points of sale accountable to user actions. If claimed counterfeit item sold, point of sale gets fine. If trademark WORDS are used in ad's, point of sale gets fined.
I read an article about it whereby Proctor Gamble I believe it was has Trademark on the term "Onesie & Onesies." Now assuming search a bit accurate, those terms come up 140,000+ times and that's just one company. I don't know maybe 3M Corp and GM have trademark on a variety of terms to. Now its not those entities seeking to fine, its government and fining point of sale. The legal website I read about this at said, "The end of days for all third party sales venues if said legislation were to pass in that form."
Now that legislation broad support of course from manufacturers who dont want unauthorized entities selling their products competing against their authorized entities.
Problem is not simply buyers, you're problem may simply be buyers but to an eBay both sides and all sides. I'm not sure Adyen can even report back to eBay if someone uses a fraudulent card legally.
We'd had stolen cards passed through our former website when we had merchant account. Sure, we loose product, we loose sale but NEVER not once with either EMS/Wells Fargo or Card Service could they tell us WHO DONE IT. Best we could do was guess... "Oh lets see, $25 transaction... We've only 75 of those over the past 6 months."
Its EXTREMELY difficult to stop buyers at the front of point of sale online when its the backend processor who has all the data and can't yield it legally.
As is discussed in another thread eTailers/retailers are subcontracting firms to help mitigate loss but they are not venues of a million different sellers where the point of sale doesn't have custody of goods. There's the biggest problem right there, custody of goods.
isaiah53-57
·3 years agoThe statement you made I put into bold text is the problem - Let card processors handle fraudulent charges - Selling venues should do everything possible to mitigate the opportunity and chance of committing fraud in the first place.
You are talking about a site that was charging sellers fees based on keyword hits in emails being sent between buyers and sellers if it appeared they were trying to make a transaction off site - They seem to get right on it if it's affecting their bottom line right?
The sellers are being vetted now like never before, so its not the sellers I'm worried about, especially with the money back guarantee...
In trying to imagine how hard it would be to eliminate serial fraudsters based on the current technology and tools available, I wouldnt think it would be that hard. I imagine that there are scammers that have hundreds of accounts, but there are only so many ship to addresses that can be used and surely "geo-prints" that are easily identified with AI tracking/tracing that could flat out eliminate serial fraudsters who make a living stealing from this site. but instead, these fraudsters can, WITH IMPUNITY, create a brand new account, that likely has fraud written all over it based on their GEO-prints, method of operation, congruencies, etc etc with ABSOLUTELY NO VETTING WHATSOEVER and attack their next unsuspecting victim.
I'm postulating it does not behoove the site to crack down on these fraudsters with the arsenal of identifying and vetting tools currently at their fingertips due to the repercussions that would come along with it.
You may not be able to get rid of them all, but you can do something about it, and Money Back Guarantee is fine if they want to assume some or all of the responsibility - If they did I would also assume they would be doing A LOT MORE to mitigate buyer fraud .... After all, "its the cost of doing business online" as so many posters here like to use here when sellers become victims - The site should practice what they preach...
retro_entertainment_collectibles
·3 years agoNot sure what you mean Geo-Print, that's art I think... You mean a Geographic Delivery Foot Print? Interesting concept but for example there are freight forwards who take custody, there are PO Boxes, there's the friend/neighbor, "Oh I may not be home so can you..."
As I noted part the problem w/ card processing is AVS the Address Validation System and there's of course the variance in geographical nations. Now in the USA Ayden which is overseas may not even have US AVS for all I know, but let's say they did. Ayden could reject anything not passing Address Zip+5 or +9, watch the orders significantly decline. Believe me astonished at things we saw, I could put you're card in as Mickey Mouse, address and zip of Disneyland and as long as card number, CVS code and funds were there it'd capture. It was ALWAYS up to us as the merchant if we care accept a payment and yes we could set the software AVS approval types. I can tell you that better than 50% of cards we processed fail AVS in one form or another. Yeah, that shouldn't happen! But Card Processor makes more money on failures than those not.
Card Processors make money coming and going.
Now I suppose a global system of a literal digital fingerprint scan might help out all sorts of operations on the Internet but that's pretty unlikely. I have to give my finger print to Walmart? For USA might do social security matching but doesn't solve the globe and probably watch buyers leave in droves.
I understand the concerns, I mean first eBay transaction I did guy ask me if a PC Game has a poster in the sealed box. Sealed box, I seem to have misplaced my Super Man see through object goggles I got when I was seven from the Lucky Charms Box. He orders, no poster, return. I'd all these new accounts watching items, making offers... Like huh? Somethin' don't smell right so I ignored em.
Scams are gonna happen both sides. You said like sellers are well vetted. Welp we'd one here just went up for four years and have to repay 3 million dollars. Pawn shop, you can imagine how that go.
I "Feel" for eBay, I see it like a giant wine barrel and everytime they patch a gun hole five more appear be they buyers, sellers, shippers, forwarders, manufacturers, counterfeiters just never ending.
isaiah53-57
·3 years agoThank You for the conversation and opinion - I appreciate your last post more than those before it - With respect to your confusion on the term "GEO-print" I guess it is a term of my own coining? For lack of a better word, something to represent the digital trails, locations, congruence and verification of information that can be used "like" fingerprints to catch a thief or detect suspicious activity that should be verified before someone can simply get up and running with a new account.
Where you lost me in your last post though, is how you "Feel" for ebay...
I personally find it hard to "feel" for a corporation/company that appears its only path forward, and always has been, is the putting of short term gain before the long term health and well-being of the site and in turn, its users.
In keeping with our topic of discussion, I feel appalled when it appears they cannot even do the most basic things that might alleviate the problem of buyer fraud... For instance, brand new sellers come here and are not led to any information that might reduce buyer fraud - How about putting them through a 15 minute tutorial before they start selling that lets them know the kind and type of fraud that takes place - what to look for and be wary of - Anything they do like this will reduce the effectiveness of career criminals and lessen their opportunities. Sadly, my guess is the ruling powers of the site figure it will stop some sellers in their tracks and to me, at best that's irresponsible and at worst, it's negligence.
Hard for me to feel sorry for a company when I cant think of a precedent setting decision they have made to positively affect the industry or their company, by improving what I would think should be an integral part of the long term vision and goals of any service based company - to make things more user friendly, and thereby attract more users. It seems all their decisions are based on short term gain at the expense of long term growth as they chase the shirt tails and ride the coat tails of the industry - Decisions, it seems, their users inevitably pay dearly for in the short term and the long run both...
retro_entertainment_collectibles
·3 years agoFirst thing is we need jump out of the sellers/buyers box and into that of the corporation. Users of said company are global all over the world ad thus developing a mechanism of tracing becomes not only logistically very difficult but also legally at nation levels. In the USA some states have even sought variances on what data can and cannot be exposed and/or used since the Fed doesn't tend weigh in. Atop that, two sides of the equation in seller/buyer. All this makes for spaghetti in trying to algorithmically create solution and put them to code (I'm a software engineer).
That said its completely valid to make statement as to why eBay did not trend towards what say Amazon vision became. Both entities and then some have navigated treacherous waters on both the domestic and global commerce scene for in excess of 20 years. Vero, Trust & Safety here, I forget what Amazon call their leg but regardless forward vision of knowing what's eventually coming was clear to see. You can say same of social media, venue's left unchecked by regulatory measure on the Net tend spin out of control. They become reactionary to current circumstances .vs. pro-active in stricter ways towards self-regulation. That is to say, "We only want to do the minimal to navigate around or through issues vs sweeping change."
Amazon had different vision and because they are a retail consignor of hard goods having custody of said goods they'd more options. They spent OODLES of money on their technology infrastructure which now it's said like 50%+ of all web HTTP requests at some point go through Amazon infrastructure. They made that IT infrastructure a salable item, for example last I knew Target's online store runs on Amazon infrastructure, Facebook, Twitter for example in part use Amazon Web Services (AWS).
How Amazon or Walmart is able to be their own card processor aggregate vs merchant only status I've not understood but I never researched it either. One might presume conflict of interest there in dispute/risk assessment mitigation and resolution. I have to assume it's arbitrated external of them somehow?
Amazon implemented Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) whereby third parties were enabled to ship product to Amazon and their order/pick automation handles fulfillment and since been expanded to their own delivery system. Point all being is they saw what was coming or potentially coming hedging their bets so to speak.
Now back at a corporate vision I dont know if eBay tried an eBay fulfillment system. The PayPal effort afforded a "Gig" somewhat similar to being a aggregate processor. Not knowing the legal beagle ends of that I have to assume that it was offshore for connected reasons and true of Adyen I'd presume since eBay has no custody of goods. I'd said in a thread here we used to work with a drop shipped who mastered their own CDROM's of public domain information(s), maps, history, on and on. Anytime no matter the issue that a dispute come in on our merchant account related to those drop ships we loose as we never had custody of the goods. Sure we could have ordered direct and done our own fulfillment but they really were not a high volume mover.
As they say and it be pertaining to sellers and buyers, "Devil's in the details" and attempting build around potential problems is difficult. I guess you might say it's like a enormous wide highway with buyers and sellers travelling it. There are numerous lanes on said highway that represent nations and some of those lanes are subdivided atop it representing State or perhaps Provinces. Goals wise want that to and fro traffic regulated by the highway department (eBay) and ramps that afford buyers and sellers to cross into various lanes, yet each lane has both similar and dissimilar requirements in many respects!
Now all that said, the eBay highway department is completely devoid of the rulesets laid down by the nations, states, provinces etc. Those rules are completely out of the eBay highway departments hands so the department need be not only adhering to "The rules of the road(s)" they've no control over. Atop this the department need be flexible enough to adjust to changes forced upon them by said principles.
Make matters even more complex there's the toll booth, payments and whilst every seller or buyer has a consistent experience in how they can pay the rules pertaining to rights of payment are completely out of the departments control. So the scenario is one of attempting control all of that within control and not only adhere to all the current external rules but also try chart and be flexible enough to those that will come and those that MIGHT come.
Managing the highway also requires trying to satisfy buyers, sellers, investors, national governments, states, provinces, manufacturers and more. Quite the tasks! Then atop all of it there's all this crime happening on the highways whereby there's that known/found and literal hordes of he said/she said.
... and we can't stop Fentanyl at the border.
Reality is that ALL PARTIES involved in said highway and lanes need have active rolls and responsibility thereof of their charge so to speak and they just don't and don't care to. Instead its one of, "Tear the highway down, people got along before it and besides, there's other highways."
Those other highways are the Amazon's, Walmarts, retailers on and offline.
Does anyone think for a moment that Poshmark or Mercari or this one / that one if eBay sellers were all to shift to them would be any better managing the highways? I'd bet be a complete disaster on epic scale.
See my friend bad sellers and bad buyers are not eBay, they are actors within the ecosystem and we judge the ecosystem upon it's reaction to those actors vs judging the actors themselves. We see this across nearly every aspect of modern societies and those not so modern.
I'll cite a complete off parallel example in firearms. When one looks at responsible governance over populations it's mere common sense that if there are less firearms there is less violence due to them. If we look to populous nations, UK, Japan, South Korea all modern highly populated nations living on far less terrain we see its nothing like the issues here.
If we look at online/offline commerce systems of individual(s) responsibility and set forth legal standards and culpability much can change but we know that isn't going to happen. A person stealing from Walmart store and caught is arrested. A person stealing from Walmart online is a completely different disaster to try prove. Believe it or not, not to long ago Postal Service tracking meant nothing in as far as a Internet/Mail Order merchant account as all that was shown is delivery, no addressing, still no addressing but they've a GPS scan now assuming the delivery person does so. Back in the day I could ship to you're door, show delivered you say its not and regardless of USPS tracking we'd loose the chargeback 100% the time. It'd show delivery to a zipcode, lovely.
This is why I put forth a more simple solution, it's not all encompassing by any means.
Seller need expose good/bad transactions and returns. Buyers metric exposes good/bad transactions, INR claims, NAD claims, Return claims, Payment dispute claims. Let the sellers/buyers filter based on those variables. So if want set that my buyers must meet or excess 90% positive transactions, any buyers under that never even see my offerings. Buyer's may set same and never see listings from sellers who don't meet or exceed said watermark.
Now the problem with that, certainly need be more defined algorithmically is that once in place there is no pulling it's plug. It's not the type of change that one can roll back nor does it coat and cover new sellers and buyers issues. Would it reverse trends? Would it yet cause further damage? All very good questions.
Now as for my "I feel for the company" I do. eBay provides a way in which folks can transact, make incomes, supplement incomes and match buyers to sellers all over the world and they can run their show. That's pretty dang cool! I am grateful for that yet in doing so bad actors on both sides of the equation will continually attempt or find ways to game the system.
I love my retro 2003 Chevy Suburban but I don't blame GM when someone crashes into me, breaks into my truck and steals things, nor the fact sometimes it feels more like I get eight gallons to the mile in heavy traffic vs eight miles to the gallon assuming no fore winds. I rather appreciate the fact that the crazy drivers avoid the monster like the plague.
I dont know how eBay assign a unique identifier to every single user that cannot be "gamed."
I would say the above system I noted might be quite helpful. What be even better be a unique solution whereby online retailers of size maintain a database whereby venues of online commerce globally share consumer data thus preventing potential problems. But it need be unique, online only. The card franchises globally already have a significant share of that data but they are not about to play as they make money coming and going on nearly all sides of the spectrum.
stuff4divas
·3 years agonever mind @pburn posted what i was going to post LOL
pburn
·3 years agoI'll jump in, too, and point out there's already an "unofficial discussion thread" on this topic:
RE: Suggestions that may be helpful to handle disputes and chargebacks
heckofagame
·3 years agoOk, I'll jump in.
Providing proof that the item matches the listing description is a "seller said, buyer said" situation. The proof would be nothing more than the pics used in the listing. There is no way to solve this dispute. The seller will always lose.