Account Restricted for Leaving Honest Feedback for Buyer Who Missused Returns

[cheyennetradingco]

We have had our account restricted for leaving honest feedback on a buyer’s page.

Buyer requested return for item not as described claiming item not sealed.  We accepted return. Received it back, sealed exactly as stated in listing, uploaded picture of sealed item to return request. Issued refund of cost minus shipping through PayPal.  Ebay overrode our decision, taking money from our PayPal account to refund buyer in full. Buyer sent multiple abusive emails calling us a crook for not offering full refund. Buyer threatened negative feedback in messages and did actually leave negative feedback. We left honest feedback for buyer summarizing the bad experience we had with buyer misusing returns. Ebay restricted account because we were honest in our feedback about the buyer. 

Ebay gives option to leave feedback for buyer after transaction yet filters it so we can only leave positive.  Sellers get penalized with restrictions it we are honest.   Ebay is deciding more of these cases in favor of the buyer leaving sellers to pay the cost in return shipping fees and reputation. Buyers know they can abuse the policies and when confronted Ebay does nothing because they consider sellers as their “employees” instead of the entrepreneurial business people we truly are and consider our customers as their buyers not the consumers who desire our products at our prices. Thinking of moving $36,000 of listings to new platform totaling $80,000 in yearly sales.  Any suggestions?

[hillbillymedia]

---

@equid0x wrote:

---

@moo*cow*corner wrote:

---

You've related (more than once) several different bad buying experiences that you've had. Sorry that those happened to you. But, if you have had all these bad buying experiences, where are the negs you've left to protect other buyers? They all got removed? Sorry, not buying that either. If it's not bad enough to leave a neg for, why complain on the boards? And then you say that buyers need the protection that bad FB offers them? Sorry again, that makes no sense to me.

---

Some here would have you believe that a full 50% of their purchases are from bad sellers and SNAD. I have a hard time swallowing that. 

---

I also have a hard time swallowing that. This is exactly why I use my main account to post. If anyone wants to see my buying and selling experience on ebay I`m leaving it out there for everyone to see. I have had very few problems on here as a buyer or a seller in comparison to my transaction ratios. Is it luck?

[the*dog*ate*my*tablecloth]

Back in the day there certainly were buyers willing to duke it out with a seller on feedback. They also knew they could just get a new id. 

It was the good buyers, the ones who thought their word and name meant something who were the ones who were offended and left.

Remember the duking it out only works if both sides are ready to fight. If ONLY the buyer or the seller is unethical, the good person on the other side loses. We already have losing sellers. Why would we want to ADD an even larger number of losing buyers? Why would it be acceptible for the upstanding buyers who believe in fairness to be driven away?

BTW I think Ebay made the right choice when they stopped using feedback to punish sellers. I think it stands now as a way for future buyers to protect themselves.

[estjoh-2]

---

@moo*cow*corner wrote:

---

@castlemagicmemories wrote:

---

---

And the buyer can't judge what isn't there.  But then again, that is the whole point.

---

You are arguing that buyers need protection before a sale. Ebay doesn't necessarily see it that way. They aren't buyers until they actually buy something. At that point, the MBG kicks in, and they are protected, no matter what. The seller always pays. Even if a neg gets removed, you can bet that ebay will be keeping track and watching. We've seen sellers get the boot with no apparent selling issues showing in their FB. And with the new service metrics, sellers will get booted for even more varieties of behind the scenes "infractions". No red donuts necessary.

---

I TV back just like I see restaurant reviews. If a restaurant has a bunch of reviews are really bad I won't eat there. just like if a seller has a bunch of reviews that are really bad I won't eat there.

also if a restaurant only has one or two bad reviews and the management has responded and is hateful, rude & nasty I won't go there.  Just like if a seller gets nasty in a feedback reply I won't by there.

As for sellers getting the boot for no apparent issue sewing in their feedback, eBay has made it very hard for buyers to leave feedback on cancelled sales.

There aren't many valid reasons for sellers to cancel, yet just about every day I see sellers who want to cancel because of new buyers, the item selling too cheap, seller under estimating postage, the sky being cloudy that day, them being constipated ect.

These are all reasons that buyers have gone elsewhere permanently. 

The bottom line is the OP broke the rules. from the looks of it they've done it more than once, and now they don't want to take their punishment like an adult. 

[southern*sweet*tea]

---

@estjoh-2 wrote:

There aren't many valid reasons for sellers to cancel, yet just about every day I see sellers who want to cancel because of new buyers, the item selling too cheap, seller under estimating postage, the sky being cloudy that day, them being constipated ect.

These are all reasons that buyers have gone elsewhere permanently. 

The bottom line is the OP broke the rules. from the looks of it they've done it more than once, and now they don't want to take their punishment like an adult. 

---

^^THIS^^

[pburn]

---

@equid0x wrote:I'm just curious... why? Surely you've walked into B&Ms many times without ever reading a single feedback comment, and the proceded to buy something, no?

FWIW - I'm an advocate of either returning to the orginal feedback system or moving to a rating system, but I am curious why you feel no feedback is necessary for a new item seller, who could just as well send you a brick, but apply a different standard to used/vintage/etc?

---

You think walking into a B&M, seeing an item on a shelf, picking it up, inspecting it, deciding whether to buy it based on all kinds of visual cues is the same as ordering online based on photos and a description written by a seller? Okay.

And, yeah. You're so right about no feedback for sellers offering new items. So, now that I think about it, without feedback, I wouldn't buy from eBay at all. Thanks for pointing that out to me.

[blueeggsandspam]

---

@the*dog*ate*my*tablecloth wrote:

Back in the day there certainly were buyers willing to duke it out with a seller on feedback. They also knew they could just get a new id. 

It was the good buyers, the ones who thought their word and name meant something who were the ones who were offended and left.

Remember the duking it out only works if both sides are ready to fight. If ONLY the buyer or the seller is unethical, the good person on the other side loses. We already have losing sellers. Why would we want to ADD an even larger number of losing buyers? Why would it be acceptible for the upstanding buyers who believe in fairness to be driven away?

BTW I think Ebay made the right choice when they stopped using feedback to punish sellers. I think it stands now as a way for future buyers to protect themselves.

---

Surely you're not insinuating that because I was willing to accept a neg from an angry seller in exchange for posting an honest negative feedback, that I wasn't a good buyer? Not all the good buyers left because their feelings were hurt.  It was just the way things worked back then. I wasn't going to let some numpty seller ruin my fun on eBay.   As soon as the next shiny object caught my eye, I was over whatever indignation I felt. I was a good buyer then, and I'm still a good buyer.

Still, in the long run it was the right move to do away with sellers negging buyers. There were many sellers abusing that option. And many buyers WERE afraid to give out well deserved negs. As the marketplace grew, it had to adapt. 

[equid0x]

---

@lunalapin1912 wrote:

---

@equid0x wrote:

---

@mam98031 wrote:

@equid0x

I'm not sure why any feedback at all is warranted when a transaction is cancelled. Since there is no actual transaction, how can there be any feedback? The seller has a legal right to refuse service, whether the buyer likes it or not. 

You appear to be assuming that the only reason for a cancellation is due to the seller's having the right to refuse service.  That actually is not one of the reasons a seller can even file for a cancellation.  While a seller could do this, it isn't within the Ebay rules and this is Ebay's site, they set the rules.   You may want to revisit the User Agreement you agreed to so that you could use this site.

---

I am well aware of eBay's policies. The cancellation reason doesn't matter. The seller can refuse to sell for any reason and there really is nothing eBay or anyone else can do about it. eBay can't force a seller to send an item any more than they can force a buyer to pay for it. There are theoretical contract issues at play but realistically, nobody is going to court over a cancelled sale - primarily because there aren't any actual provable damages. 

No transaction has occurred, so I don't see what there is to leave feedback about. Booting a seller for too many cancellations is eBay's business, and sure, they can sanction a seller from the platform for doing so, but that still doesn't complete the transaction. 

Leaving a neg on a cancellation strikes me as a somewhat childish, stamp my feet, "Wah, I didn't get what I wanted" reaction that serves no real purpose other than to stroke the ego of the buyer. In real life, things get cancelled sometimes, thats the way it is. Move on and buy the item from someone else. 

---

Most people are not on Ebay for the fun of it.  We are shopping, want to get our item in the condition promised in a timely manner.   Not getting it and waiting for your money back  or worse having to fight to get your money back is not a positive experience.  I check my sellers' feedback for cancellations.  If they cancel, I don't want to deal with them.  I appreciate it when the buyer gives me fair warning that a seller  insn't trustworthy so I can find another seller.  Other sellers should appreciate the feedback system.  Think of how may more sales a trustworthy seller gets that would get instead of them going to a untrustworthy seller and possibly losing future business for all sellers.

-----

We are talking about cancellations, not all the other stuff you mentioned. Ever drive all the way to a B&M only to find the shelf empty of that widget you want to buy? Is the B&M untrustworthy now? Why the double standard?

I recognize what Mam mentioned earlier, but this is not the norm in my experience. In all my years on here I think I've only ever had one cancellation from a seller. Painting all eBay sellers with a negative brush because of The actions of a bad actor is pretty egregious considering there are millions of vendors here.

---

[equid0x]

---

@pburn wrote:

---

@equid0x wrote:I'm just curious... why? Surely you've walked into B&Ms many times without ever reading a single feedback comment, and the proceded to buy something, no?

FWIW - I'm an advocate of either returning to the orginal feedback system or moving to a rating system, but I am curious why you feel no feedback is necessary for a new item seller, who could just as well send you a brick, but apply a different standard to used/vintage/etc?

---

You think walking into a B&M, seeing an item on a shelf, picking it up, inspecting it, deciding whether to buy it based on all kinds of visual cues is the same as ordering online based on photos and a description written by a seller? Okay.

And, yeah. You're so right about no feedback for sellers offering new items. So, now that I think about it, without feedback, I wouldn't buy from eBay at all. Thanks for pointing that out to me.

---

Do you really see the item in the B&M? 80% of the time in hard goods the item is in a box or plastic thing and all you can really look at are the pictures on the box anyways. Sometimes they have a display model to look at but not always. I think it matters what is being sold. Clothing, pillows, textiles, shoes really need to be seen and felt whereas a wireless router or car part really doesn't.

[pburn]

Now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

[the*dog*ate*my*tablecloth]

@blueeggsandspam

I didn't say anything about your situation.  Obviously you're not one of the buyers whose feelings were hurt enough that it caused you to leave.

Then you turn around and say basically the same thing I said. I'm not sure what your question means?

[equid0x]

---

@pburn wrote:

Now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

---

Nope. I'm just interested in the psychology behind the shopper that applies a different standard to looking at boxes on a shelf vs looking at boxes in a photograph, as though the experience is somehow meaningfully different other than the impulse to buy now what is in your hand because you are standing there with it in your hand. 

I think that most people actually know what they are looking for before they come here to buy it. After all, they had to have conjured up the search terms to type into that search bar from somewhere. I simply don't subscribe to the line of thinking that all the buyers here are simply lost, wayward customers who are being victimized and preyed upon by unscrupulous sellers. 

We were discussing cancellations and you mentioned scanning feedback for this. I would, too, but unless there were a large number of such feedbacks, I don't think it would set any red flags for me. At any rate, I hardly ever see mention of cancellations in seller feedbacks and when I do, its usually with very large sellers whom I can only surmise are selling on multiple sites and have probably gone out of stock due to sales on other sites. 

[pburn]

I rest my case.

[blueeggsandspam]

@the*dog*ate*my*tablecloth

Referencing my comment about buyers and sellers duking it out in feedback, you wrote: "Back in the day there certainly were buyers willing to duke it out with a seller on feedback. They also knew they could just get a new id. 

It was the good buyers, the ones who thought their word and name meant something who were the ones who were offended and left."

You seem to be saying that since I didn't get so offended that I would leave, that I'm not a good buyer. My apologies if I took what you typed too literally. It wasn't a question, more an observation.

But, I will add, not a single person I know in real life left eBay because they were negged by a seller. While annoying, it wasn't a game changer.  It was all of the changes that came after that which prompted many of my friends to abandon the site. 

[fern*wood]

I tried to read much of this thread, and it just occurred to me that I rarely check feedback on sellers.  I bought several things over the week-end and never even thought to look.  I guess I'm so comfortable with the MBG that feedback is meaningless to me.

I've stated many times that buyer feedback is pretty worthless but now I'm not even giving value to seller feedback.

[pburn]

I, too, am comfortable with the protection afforded by the MBG; however, there are a couple of reasons I continue to review feedback prior making a purchase:

1. The main reason is that I don't have a printer anymore. If I have to return an item, I have to beg a friend or neighbor to print a return label, or find the time to go to my public library to print it. If I can minimize the possibility of that, I will.

2. I buy things on eBay I want or need soon (supplies for current projects, gifts, etc.), and I don't want to waste time hassling with a bad seller, having to wait until the estimated delivery date to file an INR, and then having to buy the item from another seller and waiting for it to arrive. Same with having to send it back if it's a SNAD request.

I certainly agree with you that eBay's MBG is great, but for at least those two reasons, I still do my due diligence as a buyer to try to minimize the chance that a transaction will go south.