Community Chat, Jan 10th @ 1pm PT - General Topics

[Anonymous]

Please join us today at 1 pm Pacific today for our weekly chat with the Community Team. There is no set topic this week, so feel free to ask us any of your eBay buying & selling questions.

The thread will open for replies at 1 pm and will remain open for one hour.

Looking forward to hearing from everyone today! 

[brian@ebay]

---

@dtexley3 wrote:

Yeah, yeah, but you said cubes were cost prohibitive so don't go getting our hopes up, just to dash them into a thousand pieces again.... 

---

@dtexley3 We did discontinue some sizes for that reason, but that doesn't rule out the possibility of other sizes being introduced down the road. 

[scga912]

USPS is dropping the ball with acceptance scans and uploading acceptance information.  This isn't an isolated thing either. 

Friday morning (1/5/18) I dropped off a package and it was scanned at the counter (10:39 a.m.) and I have the receipt.  The only information USPS shows (as well as eBay) is that the package was "accepted" at the sort facility at 1:54 a.m. on Saturday 1/6/2018.

And now the package is delayed.  It took the scenic route from Savannah GA to Jax FL then to NJ to go back to Florida.   Expected Delivery Date was Tuesday 1/9/2018. 

I'm likely going to be stuck with a late shipment rate showing on my dashboard for a year for something that I didn't earn.   It's frustrating

Just sayin...

( @vrykalak ya mean like this?  receipt but apparently not uploaded to USPS)

[mallontown]

Why is it that ebay makes it so difficult to see the stars when trying to leave feedback?

If you found my reply useful, please give it a Helpful. If my response assisted in resolving your question, please click "Accept as Solution."

[Anonymous]

---

@dtexley3 wrote:

Which reminds me, is it intentional that even when a seller hides their listings if someone has the item in their watch list they can purchase anyway?

(a good reason for always updating the handling time for vacations)

---

Hi @dtexley3, this is working as currently designed and is part of the reason that adjusting handling time is recommended while a seller is on vacation. 

[Anonymous]

---

@vrykalak wrote:

have 5 'tracking indicates late shipping' on my record.
Two of them were late because the buyer wanted to buy two items, and wanted them shipped together. Two of them were submitted and scanned on time, and I have USPS receipts for them. One actually was late because I was on vacation, and thought I had changed all my shipping to 3-day, but apparently missed this one.
I can understand that eBay isn't interested in late shipment because of combined shipping (even though, in one of those cases, the buyer requested the shipping delay in an email). But i can't understand why they won't accept a receipt from the Post Office proving that items were scanned on time.
I bring it up, because it happened again last week: I have a receipt showing that the package was scanned on 2Jan, but the FIRST entry on the tracking page says it was "Accepted at USPS regional facility" the next afternoon. If it arrives "late"--which it probably will, because I live in the middle of nowhere, and everything takes longer to ship--I'll get another undeserved ding, which may cost me my TRS status.

---

Hi @vrykalak, I recommend reaching out to Customer Service to have these late shipment issues looked into. We can always remove defects or manually reinstate you back into Top Rated if an error caused a loss of this status. A reciept from the Post Office would be sufficient documentation to support us protecting your account and Customer Service will be happy to review this fo ryou.

[mallontown]

---

alan@ebay wrote:

---

@mallontown wrote:

60% of the items shipped first class did not arrive by the date ebay said they would.

The ebay shipping team must have a diferent definition of the word accurate than I have.

That is not a good buying experience for buyers and will make people wary of buying from ebay sellers in the future.

---

Thanks for your continued feedback on this topic, @mallontown. I'll share it with our Shipping team. 

---

this is the same reply as last week

[alan@ebay]

---

@scga912 wrote:

USPS is dropping the ball with acceptance scans and uploading acceptance information.  This isn't an isolated thing either. 

Friday morning (1/5/18) I dropped off a package and it was scanned at the counter (10:39 a.m.) and I have the receipt.  The only information USPS shows (as well as eBay) is that the package was "accepted" at the sort facility at 1:54 a.m. on Saturday 1/6/2018.

And now the package is delayed.  It took the scenic route from Savannah GA to Jax FL then to NJ to go back to Florida.   Expected Delivery Date was Tuesday 1/9/2018. 

I'm likely going to be stuck with a late shipment rate showing on my dashboard for a year for something that I didn't earn.   It's frustrating

Just sayin...

---

Hi @scga912, 

You should be receiving acceptance scans for your packages. If there are post offices you're having difficulty obtaining acceptance scans from, please email the specific details to griff@ebay.com. He'll follow-up on it. 

Also, you can contact eBay Customer Service to have late shipment issues looked into. We can remove defects or manually reinstate you back into Top Rated if an error caused a loss of this status. A receipt from the Post Office would be sufficient documentation to support us protecting your account and Customer Service will be happy to review this. 

Thanks. 

[mam98031]

Over the last couple of Weekly Chat threads we have been discussing the ins and outs of the current way INR claims are being processed.  Below is where we left it during last week’s Chat.

Along the way it was brought to our attention here that Ebay had made yet another unannounced change to a process that can greatly affect how some sellers conduct business.  INRs are now subject to the 3 day waiting period to close, even if tracking shows it was delivered.

I expressed my concern for this change last week, so I won’t rehash that at this point as you can see it on the post I provided from last week.  Yet another unannounced change has come to my attention.  This time is isn’t from Ebay, but from PayPal.

There was a time not so long ago that if a buyer went to PP to file a claim; they were asked if it was an Ebay transaction.  If the answer was yes, PP diverted the claim process back to Ebay.  This is no longer the case.

There was a time not so long ago that if a buyer had filed a claim in Ebay, no matter the outcome, they could not then go into PP to file a claim.  This is apparently not longer true either.

So if a buyer doesn’t like the outcome they received during the claim process in Ebay and they paid with PP, they are now allowed to open a claim in PP.  This of course means the seller has to go through the entire process yet again.

I understand that if a buyer pays with a credit card, they always have the right to start a chargeback no matter if a claim was ever opened in Ebay and/or PP, but this process of allowing buyers to open a claim in PP even though they had previously opened a claim in Ebay is VERY disturbing for so many reasons.  Please advise.

*******************************************************************************

mam98031

@re: Community Chat, Jan 3rd @ 1pm PT - General Topics

in reply to trinton@ebay 01-03-2018 01:59:03 PM

@Anonymous wrote:

@mam98031 wrote:

Last week we were chatting about INRs.  There were suggestions on how some of us feel we can make the process better and less expensive to process for both Sellers and Ebay.

Now there is reality on how the INRs are currently processed.  This particular story is not mine, but of a friend that asked me to share it here because she was unable to attend today.

She had an INR from a customer, normal stuff.  In researching the problem she found that this was being shipped to a reshipper [typically not a problem] and the buyer apparently didn't know the reshipper was no longer at the address the buyer provided, therefore the item was returned to sender.

The INR was updated by the seller with both the tracking and a note to the buyer regarding the incorrect address as well as the item being returned to sender.  In the meantime of corresponding with the buyer regarding the claim the item arrived to the seller's address in good order.  The buyer was informed.

The seller notified the buyer via the claim that they would get the INR closed and then issue them a refund for the item, but not the original shipping.  The buyer responded that this was acceptable to them.  The seller did this because she felt it was fair even though the Ebay rules do not require the seller to refund anything.  

The seller then called Ebay to get the claim closed.  The seller informed the CSR as to what she intended to do and that the buyer had agreed inside the claim to the partial refund.  The CSR stated that the claim could not be closed yet and to call back in a day or two.  The seller didn't understand why the claim could not be closed and asked again.  The CSR stood his ground so to speak and was being rather forceful with his voice according to my friend.  So she hung up and called me.

I suggested that she call again as all to frequently this is necessary to get the attention needed to a problem.  I know it should not be that way, but it is the reality of things.

The next CSR was much nicer to my friend and she explained that there was a 3 day waiting period for closing the claim.  So she would need to call back after that period had lapsed to get the claim closed even though the tracking shows that it was returned to sender due to a bad address.  She got off the phone with the CSR and then called me again.

I was surprised.  Has something changed.  I know that I've closed INRs on the same day I've received them with no contact with my buyer and with the tracking showing delivered.  Has this processed changed?

My friend called back late the next day and got the INR closed.  She then went into PP and processed a partial refund to the buyer [holding back original shipping].  She was happy and the customer was happy.  Yet the story isn't quite over.

The next day she went into her PP account and noticed that the $$ balance on this transaction was still on hold.  She couldn't get to PP yesterday via phone for answers as PP was having phone issues.  I haven't heard from my friend today as to why this happened.

The claim was not opened in PP!  The claim was closed by Ebay!!  Why in the world would PP have the right to continue to hold funds on a transaction Ebay deems to be complete???  I know you may not have these answers regarding PP, but I find this very strange.  Would they old it forever since the seller had not intended to refund the original shipping?

Hi @mam98031, happy to clarify this process. We have made changes to a sellers ability to escalate a claim early. We found that there were patterns of abuse related to cases being escalated before three full business days had passed and, while I can't be specific about what this abuse looked like, we made the decision to only allow for an earlier escalation in very few situations; primarily in instances related to restricted or suspended accounts and unauthorized transactions.  As it stands, we absolutely offer protection for sellers when delivery or an attempted delivery has been made, but would not be able to escalate the case before three full business days have passed since the request was open. 

As for the hold on the funds that is placed, this is generally released within 48 hours of the case decision being made. If this time has passed and the funds are still on hold, I would encourage a seller to contact eBay so we can look into the payment hold and see what can be done.

What a waste of time for both the seller and the buyer.  The buyer is far more likely to get upset by being told they will have to wait for the refund because Ebay has now imposed a 3 day wait on INR claims.  I know you are just sharing with me the changes in the processes by Ebay, but I'm not so sure this will improve much of anything.  

Further I don't know how a seller would "abuse" the INR process.  The seller does not control the tracking nor do they control what the tracking says.  So if the tracking shows delivered or attempted to deliver but the address was bad, what in the world could be a good reason to make the seller and buyer wait 3 days before they can process the claim for the buyer.  

My vote:  I don't like this at all and I see problems in my future.

[mam98031]

@Anonymous wrote:

@mam98031 wrote:

Last week we were chatting about INRs.  There were suggestions on how some of us feel we can make the process better and less expensive to process for both Sellers and Ebay.

Now there is reality on how the INRs are currently processed.  This particular story is not mine, but of a friend that asked me to share it here because she was unable to attend today.

She had an INR from a customer, normal stuff.  In researching the problem she found that this was being shipped to a reshipper [typically not a problem] and the buyer apparently didn't know the reshipper was no longer at the address the buyer provided, therefore the item was returned to sender.

The INR was updated by the seller with both the tracking and a note to the buyer regarding the incorrect address as well as the item being returned to sender.  In the meantime of corresponding with the buyer regarding the claim the item arrived to the seller's address in good order.  The buyer was informed.

The seller notified the buyer via the claim that they would get the INR closed and then issue them a refund for the item, but not the original shipping.  The buyer responded that this was acceptable to them.  The seller did this because she felt it was fair even though the Ebay rules do not require the seller to refund anything.  

The seller then called Ebay to get the claim closed.  The seller informed the CSR as to what she intended to do and that the buyer had agreed inside the claim to the partial refund.  The CSR stated that the claim could not be closed yet and to call back in a day or two.  The seller didn't understand why the claim could not be closed and asked again.  The CSR stood his ground so to speak and was being rather forceful with his voice according to my friend.  So she hung up and called me.

I suggested that she call again as all to frequently this is necessary to get the attention needed to a problem.  I know it should not be that way, but it is the reality of things.

The next CSR was much nicer to my friend and she explained that there was a 3 day waiting period for closing the claim.  So she would need to call back after that period had lapsed to get the claim closed even though the tracking shows that it was returned to sender due to a bad address.  She got off the phone with the CSR and then called me again.

I was surprised.  Has something changed.  I know that I've closed INRs on the same day I've received them with no contact with my buyer and with the tracking showing delivered.  Has this processed changed?

My friend called back late the next day and got the INR closed.  She then went into PP and processed a partial refund to the buyer [holding back original shipping].  She was happy and the customer was happy.  Yet the story isn't quite over.

The next day she went into her PP account and noticed that the $$ balance on this transaction was still on hold.  She couldn't get to PP yesterday via phone for answers as PP was having phone issues.  I haven't heard from my friend today as to why this happened.

The claim was not opened in PP!  The claim was closed by Ebay!!  Why in the world would PP have the right to continue to hold funds on a transaction Ebay deems to be complete???  I know you may not have these answers regarding PP, but I find this very strange.  Would they old it forever since the seller had not intended to refund the original shipping?

Hi @mam98031, happy to clarify this process. We have made changes to a sellers ability to escalate a claim early. We found that there were patterns of abuse related to cases being escalated before three full business days had passed and, while I can't be specific about what this abuse looked like, we made the decision to only allow for an earlier escalation in very few situations; primarily in instances related to restricted or suspended accounts and unauthorized transactions.  As it stands, we absolutely offer protection for sellers when delivery or an attempted delivery has been made, but would not be able to escalate the case before three full business days have passed since the request was open. 

As for the hold on the funds that is placed, this is generally released within 48 hours of the case decision being made. If this time has passed and the funds are still on hold, I would encourage a seller to contact eBay so we can look into the payment hold and see what can be done.

What a waste of time for both the seller and the buyer.  The buyer is far more likely to get upset by being told they will have to wait for the refund because Ebay has now imposed a 3 day wait on INR claims.  I know you are just sharing with me the changes in the processes by Ebay, but I'm not so sure this will improve much of anything.  

Further I don't know how a seller would "abuse" the INR process.  The seller does not control the tracking nor do they control what the tracking says.  So if the tracking shows delivered or attempted to deliver but the address was bad, what in the world could be a good reason to make the seller and buyer wait 3 days before they can process the claim for the buyer.  

My vote:  I don't like this at all and I see problems in my future.

[vrykalak]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@vrykalak wrote:

have 5 'tracking indicates late shipping' on my record.
Two of them were late because the buyer wanted to buy two items, and wanted them shipped together. Two of them were submitted and scanned on time, and I have USPS receipts for them. One actually was late because I was on vacation, and thought I had changed all my shipping to 3-day, but apparently missed this one.
I can understand that eBay isn't interested in late shipment because of combined shipping (even though, in one of those cases, the buyer requested the shipping delay in an email). But i can't understand why they won't accept a receipt from the Post Office proving that items were scanned on time.
I bring it up, because it happened again last week: I have a receipt showing that the package was scanned on 2Jan, but the FIRST entry on the tracking page says it was "Accepted at USPS regional facility" the next afternoon. If it arrives "late"--which it probably will, because I live in the middle of nowhere, and everything takes longer to ship--I'll get another undeserved ding, which may cost me my TRS status.

---

Hi @vrykalak, I recommend reaching out to Customer Service to have these late shipment issues looked into. We can always remove defects or manually reinstate you back into Top Rated if an error caused a loss of this status. A reciept from the Post Office would be sufficient documentation to support us protecting your account and Customer Service will be happy to review this fo ryou.

---

I was told last week that "tracking indicates late delivery" is unappealable, because eBay "can only go by the computer"...specifically, that they don't care if I have a receipt: what the tracking page says, goes.

[golfingaddict]

---

  this is working as currently designed and is part of the reason that adjusting handling time is recommended while a seller is on vacation. 

---

I have been using Vacation settings  for years.   6-8 times a year  at least. 

I have never had a buyer purchase while I had the items hidden..

And I have never seen this "recommendation" to change handling time.

Where is this?

[readabouthorses]

@Anonymous  You can see the message that is sent here and have the option of adding a message of your own to the content of the email. 

I've looked all over those messages, enlarged them, had a friend look at them and I still do not see any way to add any message of my own to the content of the emails. What am I missing?

I know in the past you could add a brief message to the first email that Ebay sends after the sale but I don't even see that open anymore either.

Am I just looking right at it and not seeing it? Show me the item shipped email opened with the spot where the custom message can go. Thanks.

[scga912]

---

alan@ebay wrote:

---

---

Hi @scga912, 

You should be receiving acceptance scans for your packages. If there are post offices you're having difficulty obtaining acceptance scans from, please email the specific details to griff@ebay.com. He'll follow-up on it. 

Thanks. 

---

alan@ebay

I got one.  The very first picture in my post is of the acceptance scan.   That was the point of my post.

[d-k_treasures]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@a_c_green wrote:

Just to follow up on our discussions of last month about the major toy retailer and their continued use of offsite links, their current listings do serve to confirm that they're free to continue embedding links to their own website as desired, whereas lesser sellers may get hammered for embedding offsite links or otherwise arranging offsite sales.

(When this was first brought up, several of the referenced listings were quickly edited to remove the offending links, but then edited again a week or so later, at which time the links went back in again. It's not clear whether the reinstatements were done deliberately, or were the result of uploading a new copy of a listing template that itself was never revised.)

For example, several current eBay listings of theirs reading "Find Fisher-Price products right here!" use "here!" as a hyperlink to their own website, and clicking on that takes you immediately to a catalog page of 835 more Fisher-Price products available for purchase from them, not you. Goodbye, eBay customer!

To be clear, not every listing of theirs is attempting this stunt; it seems to be limited to only listings for major brands and product lines (e.g. Fisher-Price, Thomas & Friends), for which they have their own catalog on their own website. They troll for interested customers on eBay, and then bring them in to the catalog on their own website, where the former eBay customer can now purchase that item and/or others direct from them.

The point here is not only that this seems to confirm the widespread perception that bigger sellers are allowed to ignore rules that lesser sellers must observe (that's not really surprising), but also that at least some of this ignored listing abuse doesn't even benefit eBay. Once a customer heads off to your competitor's website to make his purchases, how much eBay income goes with him?

---

Hi @a_c_green, have you emailed into the Askcommunity inbox on this topic with examples? Any time this issue has been raised we have confirmed that our sellers are all subject to the same expectations, so links to third party sites would not be allowed. This only serves to harm the Community overall and we will take steps to correct any violations that we find or that are reported to us. Appropriate coaching will be given and time will be provided to get this resolved, but we can definitely continue to follow up on this if you continue to see violations. I can email you if you need to send specific item numbers for review so we can get this addressed.

---

@a_c_green -

They do remove them when you send the item numbers. I'm not sure how long they stay gone, though - I've been too busy to check.

[brian@ebay]

---

@dtexley3 wrote:

---

brian@ebay wrote:

---

@dtexley3 wrote:

So, question from a forum thread. 

Is it allowed under eBay rules:

1) For a seller to automatically enroll a buyer in their (non-Ebay) newsletter mailing list (ie OptIn) during a purchase.  It's definately not allowed under US and CN law anymore, but what about eBay Policy?

2) Use their (non-Ebay) newsletter to drive sales to a non-eBay site for future purchases?

Thanks.

---

Hi @dtexley3, sellers shouldn't have have the option to opt buyers into their newsletter. This is something a buyer needs to subscribe themselves. If you receive unsolicited emails from a seller outside of our system then you'll want to report it to the proper enforcement agency and block future emails from them.

---

In this case the newsletter was not one that is generated on eBay, and handled through a large mailing list/newsletter handling site, but that wasnt' the question, the question was if that practice violates an eBay policy.

Thanks.

---

Hey @dtexley3, sorry that I wasn't clear on that in my previous response. Our policies can only be enforced for actions that take place on our site, meaning emails that are sent outside of our system do not violate our policy. With that said, we know it's frustrating to receive unsolicited emails. This is one reason we want to mitigate contact information, such as email addresses, being shared. I suggest reporting any emails like this to the proper agency and/or adding the email address to your spam list.

[Anonymous]

---

@dtexley3 wrote:

Has any progress been made on fixing the shipping label issue preventing us from printing a FedEx smartpost label when shipping to a PO box?  I was able to finagle a FedEx.com account with SmartPost, but it wasn't easy and not everyone can do this.  It's come up in a couple threads again recently.

---

Hi @dtexley3, no update on this at the moment. I will touch base with our tech teams to see if more information is needed in the investigation.