Buyer Using Freight Forwarder Filed a SNAD

[lovethehype]

Hello

I just recently sold a computer part earlier this month through eBay. The payment was received but I noticed that the address was a freight forwarder in Delaware. The item was shipped and successfully delivered

However, two days ago the buyer filed a SNAD case claiming the box was empty. I went ahead and contacted the freight forwarder directly and they have responded back to me, confirming that this package was indeed forwarded to the buyer. 

From my understanding, ebay's MBG is voided if they use a forwarder. However, I know it's typically hard to prove that a buyer used a forwarder. However, since I have written proof (plus pictures of the parcel from the company), do I have any ground to stand on? Furthermore, what should I do about the return?

[ittybitnot]

@lovethehype 

The question remains then as to how and where you are supposed to supply that information.  Can you get on a chat with eBay CS?  Also see the "fast track" info I posted for you in message 11.  

As far as responding to the claim, if you can't get FAST information,  typically the automated "flow" will issue a return label to the "buyer" if you accept the return.  Of course, they won't be able to use it (and may have to employ the 'cheap trinket' scam instead, and I am not certain it would even work with an "empty box" issue.  

[lovethehype]

I am going to try that fast option you mentioned. Thank you. 

[forward-motion]

This happened to me as well. My money was on hold for a good month or so. I had proof that it was delivered to the address provided by the buyer. Ebay sided with me. But it took forever and a day to get my money back. 

[ittybitnot]

Trinton posted what he posted but that is NOT what the policy says.

@pikabo-icu 

It may NOT be what the policy still says, but it is how these issues are treated now.   For example, policy says buyers are required  to return an item in the condition sent.  We all know that an empty box,  or the PROVERBIAL rock will suffice, and as we know a "cheap trinket" from another online retailer sent to the seller satisfied the return requirement as well.  

I would suspect that how the policy was applied changed due to the many "claims" being made for SNAD, and eBay got tired of paying out. 

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Selling/Freight-forwarders/m-p/30669379#M1546378

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Selling/eBay-Policy-Change-Seller-Protection-Change-when-Buyer-uses-a/...

[gjs_16]

If this were my situation I would simply accept / approve the SNAD return and I wouldn't communicate much at all, let it go from there.

I can't really elaborate further.

[pikabo-icu]

---

@ittybitnot wrote:

Trinton posted what he posted but that is NOT what the policy says.

@pikabo-icu 

It may NOT be what the policy still says, but it is how these issues are treated now.   For example, policy says buyers are required  to return an item in the condition sent.  We all know that an empty box,  or the PROVERBIAL rock will suffice, and as we know a "cheap trinket" from another online retailer sent to the seller satisfied the return requirement as well.  

I would suspect that how the policy was applied changed due to the many "claims" being made for SNAD, and eBay got tired of paying out. 

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Selling/Freight-forwarders/m-p/30669379#M1546378

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Selling/eBay-Policy-Change-Seller-Protection-Change-when-Buyer-uses-a/...

---

So you are telling me that in one of the VERY few cases, that seller is protected,  where policy is clearly written that eBay is violating their own policy?  

I know what's posted there but if they can't be trusted to follow their own rules that are clearly spelled out, what chance does any seller have here? 

brian@ebay 

brittanie@ebay 

We NEED some clarification here..

Does eBay stand by the policy the MBG is VOID for freight forwarders as listed in the policy or not?

Thank you

[a_c_green]

---

@pikabo-icu wrote:

---

The convo with Trinton was a hot mess and he was not citing the policy correctly.. 

@a_c_green  Check it out.. That thread is still causing confusion. UGH

---

"Check it out"? I was in it... 😜 I just re-read it... What a blast from the past that was... Thanks to @eleanor*rigby for posting that link to it above. (https://community.ebay.com/t5/Selling/Freight-forwarders/td-p/30669020)

The point remains that Trinton was fabricating some very creative interpretations of why the freight-forwarder exclusions would not apply (e.g. the buyer could be an employee of the forwarding company buying it for himself), although none of his creative interpretations were actually documented in eBay rules. He got rather evasive when asked how one was supposed to prove that the exclusions should apply in the OP's case (e.g. the buyer really was in Russia and not working at the forwarding company). He left the company a short while later and is now listed as an eBay staff "alumni" in Community posts.

I still think the case is worth fighting on its merits if the OP loses the initial dispute, because it's possible to provide a link pointing to the MGB exclusion for re-shipped or forwarded items (which is also quoted in this thread), and those rules do not veer off into an odd list of exceptions such as what Trinton was suggesting.

[lovethehype]

So essentially, you accepted the return and eBay investigated after you initiated it?

[stainlessenginecovers]

If the OP accepts the return and provides a label; that label is from the Forwarder to himself. The OP does not have to provide a shipping label from XYZ country to himself- correct?

Doesn't the buyer have to provide their own shipping back to the forwarder? 

[ittybitnot]

 I had proof that it was delivered to the address provided by the buyer.

@forward-motion 

Our OP has proof of delivery.  The "buyer" is claiming the box was empty, making this a SNAD issue. Obviously, the box arrived or the phony  "empty box" claim could not be employed.  

The question remains is related to ebay accepting the "proof" this OP has regarding the parcel was actually re-shipped to their client, and where they are supposed to submit it. 

[forward-motion]

I think it was automatically accepted by ebay, but I contacted them and it stayed in limbo with an investigation. I had proof from Fedex that it was indeed delivered to the Delaware address the buyer provided. Like I said it took at least a month before my money was released. But I did win, and I did get my money.   

[lovethehype]

That's encouraging to hear. I don't really care how long it takes for me to get my money back as long as I do. 

[forward-motion]

I have had a couple forward shipping cases that I won. No empty box claim yet. But one went missing, and one was damaged. I don't think they have a leg to stand on after they use another shipping company. 

[ittybitnot]

@lovethehype 

I think the claim information posted by @forward-motion  involved an "item not received" claim.  Yours is different.  Providing tracking showing "delivery confirmation" does NOT help with an "empty box" claim. 

[eleanor*rigby]

---

@a_c_green wrote:

---

@pikabo-icu wrote:

---

The convo with Trinton was a hot mess and he was not citing the policy correctly.. 

@a_c_green  Check it out.. That thread is still causing confusion. UGH

---

"Check it out"? I was in it... 😜 I just re-read it... What a blast from the past that was... Thanks to @eleanor*rigby for posting that link to it above.

The point remains that Trinton was fabricating some very creative interpretations of why the freight-forwarder exclusions would not apply (e.g. the buyer could be an employee of the forwarding company buying it for himself), although none of his creative interpretations were actually documented in eBay rules. He got rather evasive when asked how one was supposed to prove that the exclusions should apply in the OP's case (e.g. the buyer really was in Russia and not working at the forwarding company). He left the company a short while later and is now listed as an eBay staff "alumni" in Community posts.

I still think the case is worth fighting on its merits if the OP loses the initial dispute, because it's possible to provide a link pointing to the MGB exclusion for re-shipped or forwarded items (which is also quoted in this thread), and those rules do not veer off into an odd list of exceptions such as what Trinton was suggesting.

---

@a_c_green 

You're welcome! 😉

I think it's time to request an update of eBay's interpretation of their policy regarding seller protection for items that have been forwarded to another address. 

brian@ebay, brittanie@ebay, tyler@ebay 

The issue of whether parcels forwarded by a freight forwarder qualify for buyer protection, along with any existing seller protections, comes up quite frequently on the discussion boards. I, at least, have been relying on Trinton's comments in the thread cited in previous posts for guidance on when a parcel qualifies and how sellers can protect themselves from false claims; however, Trinton's replies are now being called into question, perhaps legitimately so. 

Could we get an explanation of eBay's current position of under what circumstances a forwarded package does and does not qualify for buyer protection and what sellers need to do when confronted with an INR or a INAD for a forwarded package, including whether and how proof of forwarding comes into play?

Thanks!