Correct Listing Descriptions no longer protect sellers

[greatpartsgooddeals]

Correct Item Descriptons no longer protect you !! YOU are now FORCED to ACCEPT RETURNS

This to me is a VIOLATION of eBay's very own policy which states "under the eBay Money Back Guarantee the buyer can still return an item if it doesn't match the listing description. "

Let me start off by stating that I have multiple seller accounts and have been here for nearly 20 years now

Ebay has generally had my back through the years whenever buyers filed bogus or false Return claims WHENEVER I COULD GET THE BUYER TO ADMIT that he made the mistake, but within the last month this has all changed. I have now been told repeatedly by Ebay CS Reps to accept a return EVEN when the buyer ADMITS IN WRITING that they failed to read the Ad Description and yet are complaining about the very flaws THAT I MENTIONED AND PHOTOGRAPHED UP CLOSE!! More troubling is when A buyer ADMITS that he bought a driver's side item, instead of the passenger's side item and yet I AM FORCED TO TAKE THE RETURN AND PAY FOR THE RETURN SHIPPING!!

In the past whenever I managed to get the buyer to admit a mistake ebay would immediately close the claim in my favor without any waiting period. Within the past 4 weeks now however on 5 different items I have been told by an ebay CS Rep that "YES you described the item accurately and disclosed the flaws in writing BUT YOU STILL MUST ACCEPT THE RETURN." then they add "of course you can Appeal this decision once you get the item back" ...REALLY? FOR  WHAT PURPOSE?? You HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION IN FRONT OF YOU RIGHT NOW AND YOU ARE RULING AGAINST ME!!

So even though I am NOT at fault, I'm STILL BLAMED and NOW these FALSE Buyer Return Claims could end up costing me 4% more in FVF!

THIS INJUSTICE HAS MY BLOOD BOILING !!

[castlemagicmemories]

I think Ebay stopped mediating in these situations in June.  Calling in doesn't help anymore.

[div_style]

I realize there are some categories that SNAD-eriffic, and some that are scammer magnets, and sometimes because buyers are using mobile and don't see, or even realize, that there is a description they are mislead, but for the most part sellers themselves have the most responsibility for controlling SNADs, and that means doing whatever it takes to see that buyers get exactly what they expected.

And yes I realize that I compressed a whole paragraph into one grammatically-correct sentence, but I am not concerned that some high-ranking government official might not understand it.

[purginghouse]

Yes I have noticed this recently... sent a dog costume that had 2 eyes when it shipped, they returned due to size... but only came back with one eye.   So, I contacted cs and because I escalted the claim they said that would cause a defect on MY rating and they REFUNDED HER IN FULL!   Reps kept telling me that in order for Ebay to have your back and in a case like this be allowed to only refund 50% I have to be part of the "free returns"!   Sorry I am already losing money that I no longer can charge a restocking fee.  This is going to kill me because I sell halloween costumes and the buyers that wear them then return them and now I am FORCED TO REFUND 100%!   I do not understand what Ebay is doing... they have opened up the flood gates for abusers to take advantage of sellers.

[emerald40]

---

@7606dennis wrote:

---

@emerald40 wrote:

Correct description - yes as you see it.  But you can miss things, I know I have.

And things can get damaged in shipping, caught in machines, at the mercy of ape like carriers throwing it here and there.

Sometimes the buyer is correct, it is not as described.

---

I agree, but there should be some sort of review process and not the simple taking of one sides viewpoint every time.

---

Ebay does not see the item coming or going so how could they make that determination.

But I do agree and suggested this in the past.  Take into account a seller vs buyer history on ebat.

A seller with thousands and thousands of perfect feedback did not suddenly fall on his head and decide to start scamming people.  So do give the seller the benefit of the doubt against a 0 feedback buyer or one who has a history of doing this to others,

[castlemagicmemories]

---

@emerald40 wrote:

Correct description - yes as you see it.  But you can miss things, I know I have.

And things can get damaged in shipping, caught in machines, at the mercy of ape like carriers throwing it here and there.

Sometimes the buyer is correct, it is not as described.

---

You would think that never happens from what you see around here, though.

Some dispute a legitimate SNAD even when the damage may then be seen in the listing pics (but hard to notice if you don't know it is there and the description does not disclose this).

[7606dennis]

---

@emerald40 wrote:

---

@7606dennis wrote:

---

@emerald40 wrote:

Correct description - yes as you see it.  But you can miss things, I know I have.

And things can get damaged in shipping, caught in machines, at the mercy of ape like carriers throwing it here and there.

Sometimes the buyer is correct, it is not as described.

---

I agree, but there should be some sort of review process and not the simple taking of one sides viewpoint every time.

---

Ebay does not see the item coming or going so how could they make that determination.

But I do agree and suggested this in the past.  Take into account a seller vs buyer history on ebat.

A seller with thousands and thousands of perfect feedback did not suddenly fall on his head and decide to start scamming people.  So do give the seller the benefit of the doubt against a 0 feedback buyer or one who has a history of doing this to others,

---

While it is true that eBay cannot see the item, automatically accepting a SNAD dispute and ruling in the buyer's favor merely because they have said it was not as described makes no sense when the buyer, in their claim, makes statements that clearly conflicts with what was in the description.  If the description states that an item measures 16x20 inches and the buyer claims that it only measures 16x20 inches instead of 20x24 inches that they want.  It is obvious that the there is no justification for the claim of it not being as described.  For eBay to automatically side with the buyer is ludicrous.  

While there may be no way for eBay to determine if the buyer is being truthful when filing disputes or if the seller has not been entirely truthful in their description, eBay should at least check to determine if the complaint fits the facts presented by the person making the complaint.

[greatpartsgooddeals]

Well they certainly are not correct when they are complaing that they didn't get a black seat when the ebay Ad Title ,descriprion  and photos all show a Gray Seat.......but ebay says well they said it was defective so you have to take it back and pay for it or we will gove you a defect...ummmm NO they used defective as the SNAD and then wrote in the comments that they thought it was black but it is gray...This is a miscarriage of justice my friend

[ersatz_sobriquet]

Dennis and Greatpartsgooddeals, that correct logic is meaningless here. 

[7606dennis]

---

@ersatz_sobriquet wrote:

Dennis and Greatpartsgooddeals, that correct logic is meaningless here. 

---

Alas!  You are correct.  In the alternate reality that is known as eBay, logic doesn't seem to apply.  

[poppyswag]

So now the question becomes, is it worth it to write an accurate description? And why? SMH 

[emerald40]

---

@castlemagicmemories wrote:

---

@emerald40 wrote:

Correct description - yes as you see it.  But you can miss things, I know I have.

And things can get damaged in shipping, caught in machines, at the mercy of ape like carriers throwing it here and there.

Sometimes the buyer is correct, it is not as described.

---

You would think that never happens from what you see around here, though.

Some dispute a legitimate SNAD even when the damage may then be seen in the listing pics (but hard to notice if you don't know it is there and the description does not disclose this).

___________________________________

I think part of the problem is when a seller packs it up the item is perfect.  But then it travels from point A to point B and something happens to it.  So both seller and buyer are correct.  It left the seller's house in good condition but did not arrive to the buyer's home that same way.

I have seen it.  UPS was delivering a package to me and he just practically threw it out the open door and slid it across my drive way.  Now I know time is important and their trucks have to be completely cleared out before they can call it a day, but ............

---

[2015mhfashions]

Absolutely pointless, got a Snad on it's way now, buyer asked me to measure the jean accross the waistband laid flat, did so took the photo 14.5" across clearly showed, he now says 14" across, take a look at the photo you were sent through E Bay messages liar, I'm now out shipping both ways with a Snad defect against my metrics because of a blatant lie, photographic proof sent to the buyer through messages means nothing, so guess what, any further messages asking for this, " refer to the label sizes " not wasting my time or effort anymore with requests like this, E bay get a grip, it's not a free try on service, if it doesn't fit it's on them not me.

[emerald40]

---

@7606dennis wrote:

---

@emerald40 wrote:

---

@7606dennis wrote:

---

@emerald40 wrote:

Correct description - yes as you see it.  But you can miss things, I know I have.

And things can get damaged in shipping, caught in machines, at the mercy of ape like carriers throwing it here and there.

Sometimes the buyer is correct, it is not as described.

---

I agree, but there should be some sort of review process and not the simple taking of one sides viewpoint every time.

---

Ebay does not see the item coming or going so how could they make that determination.

But I do agree and suggested this in the past.  Take into account a seller vs buyer history on ebat.

A seller with thousands and thousands of perfect feedback did not suddenly fall on his head and decide to start scamming people.  So do give the seller the benefit of the doubt against a 0 feedback buyer or one who has a history of doing this to others,

---

While it is true that eBay cannot see the item, automatically accepting a SNAD dispute and ruling in the buyer's favor merely because they have said it was not as described makes no sense when the buyer, in their claim, makes statements that clearly conflicts with what was in the description.  If the description states that an item measures 16x20 inches and the buyer claims that it only measures 16x20 inches instead of 20x24 inches that they want.  It is obvious that the there is no justification for the claim of it not being as described.  For eBay to automatically side with the buyer is ludicrous.  

While there may be no way for eBay to determine if the buyer is being truthful when filing disputes or if the seller has not been entirely truthful in their description, eBay should at least check to determine if the complaint fits the facts presented by the person making the complaint.

 __________________________________________

I believe I remember this discussion from before that ebay does not read past the title of the complaint.  This was discussed where a buyer put snad in the title but in the description she admitted it was remorse.  All ebay saw was SNAD and did not bother reading further.

---

[emerald40]

---

@greatpartsgooddeals wrote:

Well they certainly are not correct when they are complaing that they didn't get a black seat when the ebay Ad Title ,descriprion  and photos all show a Gray Seat.......but ebay says well they said it was defective so you have to take it back and pay for it or we will gove you a defect...ummmm NO they used defective as the SNAD and then wrote in the comments that they thought it was black but it is gray...This is a miscarriage of justice my friend

---

Please see my other thread where this was brought up previously that ebay does not look further than the title  and that they completely disregard or do not even bother to read what is in the description.

[7606dennis]

---

@emerald40 wrote:

---

@greatpartsgooddeals wrote:

Well they certainly are not correct when they are complaing that they didn't get a black seat when the ebay Ad Title ,descriprion  and photos all show a Gray Seat.......but ebay says well they said it was defective so you have to take it back and pay for it or we will gove you a defect...ummmm NO they used defective as the SNAD and then wrote in the comments that they thought it was black but it is gray...This is a miscarriage of justice my friend

---

Please see my other thread where this was brought up previously that ebay does not look further than the title  and that they completely disregard or do not even bother to read what is in the description.

---

Then it would appear that eBay is failing to perform their due diligence when it comes to mediating alleged SNAD disputes between buyers and sellers.

I once attended a hearing where an apprentice in an apprenticeship program having followed the terms of the apprenticeship was being denied credit for satisfactorily completing the program because of an error made by program directors when he had been enrolled in the program.  They had given him credit for previous work experience in the industry which they, after he had completed the remainder of the program, later denied should have been given.  They then convened a meeting of the board that had made the error and confronted the apprentice as if he was somehow responsible for their error. 

As it happens, the representative from the State Department of Labor which was suppose to attend did not show up but sent a message that they approved everything done by the board at the hearing prior to it.  As it happened, an attorney also present at the hearing, when he heard of that, immediately pointed out that the hearing was a sham since the that representative was not present to hear the apprentice's side or witness the questioning but had agreed to go along with whatever the board decided. 

The end result was that the board recommended that the apprentice be awarded certification for completing the program.  Alas!  The apprenticeship program was soon after discontinued after the national organization was informed of the incident.  I'm not positive, but I also heard that the State Department of Labor representative found himself unemployed shortly afterward.  It goes to show that predetermining the outcome of things without at least looking at the details isn't a good thing.