mam98031 • Volunteer Community Member • Buyer/Seller since 1999
- last edited on by
kh-brendonm
I have received an automatic email from EBay regarding my "high return rate."
I want to make sure EBay knows that some of the returns I had were ruled on my favor (i.e. the buyer did not returned the item). So, I can't control how many people decided to scam me over.
- Case 1 did not return the item, thus the case was ruled in my favor.
- Case 2 I refunded the buyer as a courtesy despite the item was in the Men's section when i purchased it at a thrift store.
- Case 3 I provided a partial refund despite the buyer's ridiculous claim that the item did not include whatever the "soccer tag" despite my listing description that it might not include all tags (at least I do guarantee price tag) to prevent unauthorized store returns by my supplier.
I gave partial refunds simply for courtesy, and now EBay tries to charge me more because "I didn't do my job right?!" I know at least one of them is just ridiculous because the buyer did not return the item and the case was ruled in my favor, but it still triggers that "High item not as described rate" email. I am 1 case away from not having to pay for the 4% additional final value fee penalty that will be imposed to my account beginning the next billing cycle. EBay is now giving buyers more power to put sellers in jeopardy by pushing their "Item not as described returns" rate to the roof and make them pay 4 additional % for final value fees. It's crazy. The metrics is not even count toward how many cases it rules against me, but how many cases it was OPENED against me, whether the cases were ruled in my favor or not.
Some sellers circumvent this issue by issuing partial refunds without going through the system. Is EBay that money hungry that they want higher final value fees on categories that I sell? Are the additional final value fees already applying on my listings? Please adjust the "Item not as described returns" percentage to reflect the actual rate" and make sure I do not have to pay higher amount of final value fees.
MAKE SURE YOU ALSO KNOW that many sellers I know they would try to circumvent the system by not asking the buyers to open SNAD requests and just do refunds directly from paypal. I am too honest on this, and it sounds like EBay is asking me to cheat!
Let's discuss this a bit. I find your statement above very interesting and presumptuous. Please provide a link to whatever policy says that we [sellers] have to use the claims system or we are somehow circumventing the system. I mean absolutely no disrespect to your opinion, but make no mistake, it is an opinion, not a requirement by Ebay.
What Ebay wants is happy satisfied customers. If a seller can provide this to a customer [buyer] within the selling rules of Ebay and without using the claim system to accomplish this, there is no problem whatsoever. Sellers that do this are no less "honest" than you are nor are they trying to "cheat" Ebay in any way. We pay our fees that are appropriate to the sale and we take care of our customers with the quality of service in which they deserve. The customer goes away happy and the seller had provided the quality of service to the customer that should be expected from all sellers.
Why it the world do you think it is better for a buyer to have to go through the SNAD system if they don't want to and the seller is willing to provide the service they desire? At any time if the buyer/customer feels they are not getting what they need or deserve from the seller, they can open a SNAD.
@kevinvarietystore wrote:
(this reply is copied from the Community Chat)
The issue is how unrealistic the standard is for smaller sellers. Yes, EBay has the right to set their own policies. No, it doesn't make it right. I called 3 times to the customer service hotline and the staffs don't even have any knowledge of Service Matrics until they do a 15 minute hold research and tell the fact that it's based on how many return requests that are opened against me, now how many cases closed in buyers' favor and closed without appeal. Since there's a minimum of 10 requests in order to be penalized, EBay is asked sellers not to sell on EBay.
When the policy first mentioned in the summer update, I know that if I am put in a "very high" category, I will be subjected to higher fees. And, now I know 1% IS CONSIDERED AS VERY HIGH. NOT 10%, NOT 5%. It was intentionally vague so it wouldn't cause any outrage until now. Even Walmart and other department stores have a return rate much higher than that, remorse and defects. That's why I have a ton of overstocks/returned lots to buy from liquidation companies. EBay is making me pay more not because I am a bad seller, but because of 1 extra SNAD requests that's ruled in my favor. According to the Service Metric, I am 1 request too much to pay the 4% increase.
This is not intended to punish bad sellers. If it was to do so, it would be in 5% SNAD rate, not 1%. If EBay wants my money, JUST RAISE THE FINAL VALUE FEE.
-------------
I want to be heard, and EBay needs to make themselves a friendly platform. I am not being heard, and what I said needs to be considered in the management.
Who is going to foot the bill for the 4% increase in final value fee? Me. Unless someone would do me a good favor and foot the difference for me.
Hi @kevinvarietystore - I'm sorry that you feel like you aren't being heard. I hear your dissatisfaction with the new metric. I get that it has a tangible impact to your business, and that this has left you feeling helpless and without recourse.
To reiterate things I mentioned in the weekly chat, this is a metric that compares you to peers in the same category, with the same volume, average sale price, return policy and shipping estimates. The metric is going to change based on your business and the business of your peers as well as the volume of returns for that peer group in the lookback period (3 or 12 months). Regardless of what the percentage is, if your rate of Not as Described returns opened is much higher than your peers then you will experience the consequences that we outlined.
We're confident that the steps we've taken to compare members in similar situations to one another will prevent a large business from dwarfing out medium or small sellers and skewing metrics - which is the same reason why we have thresholds to be considered for this metric. Thanks for you time!
@kevinvarietystore wrote:So, when will the 4% penalty kick in (and kick out)? The next billing cycle or October 1st? My billing cycle is on the 15th of every month.
It is not based on billing cycles. They eval all sellers on the 20th of each month for the period ended the previous month. That evaluation affects sellers on the 1st of the following month.
So for example the eval of September 20th was for the period ending August 31st. Whatever that eval determined about your Selling Status and your Service Metrics will be effective on October 1st.
@street-motto-cycles wrote:So what is it? 3 or 12 month period ?
As it always has, it depends on the level of your selling account. For sellers that have 400+ transactions in the previous 90 day period, then you are eval'd on the previous 90 days.
For sellers with less than 400 transaction in the previous 90 day period, they are eval'd on the previous 12 month period.
This has not changed. However sellers yelled loud enough and long enough about this being retroactive that Ebay reconsidered their position and decided that the eval will not go back further than June 1st for the Service Metrics even if you are eval'd on the previous 12 months.
@jasoheat_0 wrote:
ebay is expensive ... my selling costs are 32% not including cost of item
Why are your selling fees that high? Are you including other costs in there that don't belong, like shipping costs? Unless you are doing a lot of upgrades with your listings I don't see how it can be that high of a percentage. Please give us more details so we can better understand why your percentage of fees is so high. Maybe we can help you reduce your costs.
