eBay

bengregg91 · ‎10-27-2017

Hey everyone - I was curious if any other sellers have run into a situation like this before...

I sold a used auto headlight. I listed the condition as for parts/ not working and tried to give a decent description and posted a lot of pictures. I explicitly stated that the headlight was broken, the seal was bad, and that it would need to be worked on by someone handy. I listed this item as a non-returnable item because I have no use for it.

Someone purchased the headlight and when they received it they decided that it was more broken than they could work with. They noted that I used the word "crack" instead of "hole" in describing part of the headlight. I kind of felt bad about using the word "crack" interchangably but this defect was clearly visible in the pictures I posted.

The buyer opened a return and posted very upclose pictures of the hole, exagerating its size a bit. I responded that the defect was clear in the photos originally accompanying the item and also mentioned to some extent in the description.

I was concerned about what would happen so I contacted Ebay's support team. They said that based on the evidence they would likely rule in my favor if a case was open. This was re-assuring.

The buyer still hadn't responded to the message I sent after they opened the return so I made another call to Ebay support to make sure I would be ready for the next step. This time the agent I talked to stated that if a case was opened, she would leave a note on my account so that it was automatically dismissed and ruled in my favor. That was a true relief...

Until today happened. A case was opened and within 10 minutes it was ruled in favor of the buyer. I spent hours of my time making sure this wouldn't happen. I really wouldn't mind the item being returned except that the buyer chose to use priority shipping, which was over 3x (ended up being $67 instead of $20) more than standard shipping. I even advised the buyer in two messages that he/ she would save $45 dollars using standard. I even sent the buyer the differnce between the shipping quote and what he/ she paid for shipping over Paypal because I felt bad that priority costed so much.

While I am upset about Ebay's ruling on this case, I am more upset that two of their support agents gave me word that it would go the opposite direction. At the least I could have offered a partial refund back at that point. Also, the policy for having to pay for the shipping of an item as part of the refund it ridiculous. This was an $80 item. The priority delivery quote was $67. I'm guessing the buyer could have also asked for even quicker shipping method (overnight, etc.) that would have cost over $100. Why should I be responsible for refunding that amount when I have no control over it?

Has anyone found themselves in a sticky situation like this before?

castlemagicmemories · ‎10-29-2017

@carlmarxx wrote:
@castlemagicmemories wrote:
While Ebay may not pay much for their off shore CS, it still costs. And every time a seller does not accurately describe what they have, it costs Ebay. Now I understand the OP made an unfortunate choice of words there, things happen,

But I imagine that is part of the push to be like Amazon. New in the box items have much less potential to blow up in the buyer's, or Ebay's, faces. Lower cost equals more profit.

So the very thing that gives Ebay an advantage, used or vintage items, is a two edged sword. And as it disappears, or if it disappears, that will be a blow to the individuality and uniqueness that is Ebay. And I think both sides of the equation, buyers and sellers, will have been at fault for this.

I don't total agree with on that Used or vintage items is a two edged sword on ebay. Since Snad case's very low for those items, Where as New items and high tech items have more snads with most being on the phoney side . Op should have done better job on giving the details of item they sold.

With all due respect, I see your point, I did not take into account the fake or counterfeit new items. But the issue, I think, with vintage or used, is that the item may not be described properly. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE to buy vintage and used, but while there really weren't problems buying these things years ago, it seem the proliferation of sellers and cell phones has lead to some being careless and not disposed towards an accurate and adequate description. I am not saying that happens is ALL cases, just that it can. That is what I mean by vintage and used can be a two edged sword. Of course, part of that may also be laid on the buyer, who may have no idea or concept that a used item or vintage item is not going to be pristine, even if the seller specifically and very accurately describes the item condition.

I buy with understanding, tolerance, and a grain of salt but sometimes I am surprised by what I receive.

castlemagicmemories · ‎10-29-2017

@ittybitnot wrote:
I don't understand why anyone would try to sell something broken and defective. Just asking for trouble

You never know...Sold a "broken teapot" once. Had a giant crack from a point on the rim, down the side, across the bottom and up the other side. Someone had glued a "marble" on top of the lid because the finial was missing. Sold for $490, and buyer was thrilled. Told me "real collectors" don't mind the defects. LOLOLOLOL.....

I bought a broken tea set once. I wanted the teapot as my Nanna had the same one when I was a child. She had received it as a wedding gift and it was treasured in her china cabinet. Beautiful Nippon, thatched hut scene with a swan on the lake, turquoise blue rim overlaid with gold scrolling.

Seller listed teapot, sugar and creamer. One had the handle broken, I can't recall now if it was the sugar or the creamer. The handle was there and was a clean break, easily fixed. Seller very helpful in answering my question on the break. But I really didn't care if I could fix that or not, the teapot was paramount.

Bought the set for a very low price. Fixed the handle. They reside in my cabinet now, a very treasured memory. And I thanked the seller profusely and told him how much this meant to me and how happy I was he listed it. He told me he wasn't going to because it was broken but was glad I found it.

castlemagicmemories · ‎10-29-2017

Use it up, make it do, or do without!

castlemagicmemories · ‎10-29-2017

@ted_200 wrote:
As you say, the MBG is plastered all over. Most buyers know how it works, but not all sellers do, and that is unfortunate.

I basically agree with no returns, if listed for parts, not working. But in cases where the damage is very clearly far more extensive than it was portrayed? I am not so sure. Even if for parts, not working, the description and pictures need to be accurate.

As a whole, buyers are far less sophisticated in this stuff than sellers. I would imagine most buyers see "Money Back Guarantee" and believe they are guaranteed to get their money back - because that's the plain English of the situation. Most sellers have been to this dance more times, and understand it's a lot more complicated - as evidenced by this seller's concerns and them contacting eBay CS twice.

I consider "crack" vs. "hole" to be a semantics argument at best - especially if the damage in question is shown in the photos - and not "damage is very clearly far more extensive than it was portrayed".   The buyer admits they knew it was damaged, and wanted it anyhow, and that they intended to repair it for use. If I know it's busted, and I intend to repair it, then I would think I'm going to look at the pictures, and think long and hard before sinking eighty bucks into a "no returns" item... or even if it does have Returns Accepted, since it apparently would cost me $67 shipping to return it. The buyer knew all this. But the buyer also knows the MBG, so they know they can over-ride "no returns", and won't even have to pay return shipping... so they will buy it even if they think there's only a 5% chance it can be repaired.

Buyer abused MBG? Or buyer used MBG exactly as eBay intended it to be used? I can't really say. All I know is the seller sold a damaged non-working item, that they clearly described as damaged and not working, and that's exactly what the buyer got.   Regardless of the CS issues (a legitimate complaint), MBG made this "no returns" sale into a "on approval, seller pays return freight" sale. The seller got abused, I just can't say exactly by whom.

In a way, I tend to think the buyer did abuse the MBG. Seller was wrong, there is a big difference between a crack, and a hole, IMO. A crack is just a slit in the composition material, but a hole is bigger than that and compromises the integrity of the composition in a way a crack does not.

The buyer should have looked at the pictures since the damage was portrayed, BUT the seller, IMO and theirs, did misstate the damage.

Buye may have missed the damage in the picture, and thus went by the description, and that was a bit off.

So possibly both are at fault here. But the OP did get bad advice from CS, advice that worked adversely toward the seller.

carlmarxx · ‎10-30-2017

carlmarxx · ‎10-30-2017

@castlemagicmemories wrote:
@ted_200 wrote:
As you say, the MBG is plastered all over. Most buyers know how it works, but not all sellers do, and that is unfortunate.

I basically agree with no returns, if listed for parts, not working. But in cases where the damage is very clearly far more extensive than it was portrayed? I am not so sure. Even if for parts, not working, the description and pictures need to be accurate.

As a whole, buyers are far less sophisticated in this stuff than sellers. I would imagine most buyers see "Money Back Guarantee" and believe they are guaranteed to get their money back - because that's the plain English of the situation. Most sellers have been to this dance more times, and understand it's a lot more complicated - as evidenced by this seller's concerns and them contacting eBay CS twice.

I consider "crack" vs. "hole" to be a semantics argument at best - especially if the damage in question is shown in the photos - and not "damage is very clearly far more extensive than it was portrayed".   The buyer admits they knew it was damaged, and wanted it anyhow, and that they intended to repair it for use. If I know it's busted, and I intend to repair it, then I would think I'm going to look at the pictures, and think long and hard before sinking eighty bucks into a "no returns" item... or even if it does have Returns Accepted, since it apparently would cost me $67 shipping to return it. The buyer knew all this. But the buyer also knows the MBG, so they know they can over-ride "no returns", and won't even have to pay return shipping... so they will buy it even if they think there's only a 5% chance it can be repaired.

Buyer abused MBG? Or buyer used MBG exactly as eBay intended it to be used? I can't really say. All I know is the seller sold a damaged non-working item, that they clearly described as damaged and not working, and that's exactly what the buyer got.   Regardless of the CS issues (a legitimate complaint), MBG made this "no returns" sale into a "on approval, seller pays return freight" sale. The seller got abused, I just can't say exactly by whom.

In a way, I tend to think the buyer did abuse the MBG. Seller was wrong, there is a big difference between a crack, and a hole, IMO. A crack is just a slit in the composition material, but a hole is bigger than that and compromises the integrity of the composition in a way a crack does not.

The buyer should have looked at the pictures since the damage was portrayed, BUT the seller, IMO and theirs, did misstate the damage.

Buye may have missed the damage in the picture, and thus went by the description, and that was a bit off.

So possibly both are at fault here. But the OP did get bad advice from CS, advice that worked adversely toward the seller.

The Problem is Majoredy of current CRS folk's now working for ebay were 2 to 3 years old when ebay was founded !

castlemagicmemories · ‎10-30-2017

carlmarxx · ‎10-30-2017

@castlemagicmemories wrote:

I hoped you liked that post. But for most point most of the CSR rep's where too young to do ebay ,before they old enough too came to work for ebay.

bengregg91 · ‎10-31-2017

This is just a quick follow up on everything for those interested. Ebay made things right for both the buyer and I. Thank you, Trinton for looking at the case.

I am glad I found this forum because I doubt I would have seen the same resolve going through the standard case/ appeal process.

I read all of the comments in this thread. I suppose I have some reading to do about the selling process. I will also make sure to be very careful with the words I use in listing descriptions going forward.

There were a few responses inline with "don't sell dumpster items on Ebay". I think that depends on the item. If you look at Reconditioned 2008 Lexus IS 350 OEM HID headlights you will see that they are going for $300-600. New headlight units cost over $1000 per side. The one I listed probably needs 3 hours of work to get into decent recondintioned shape and it was listed for $55.

carlmarxx · ‎10-31-2017

@bengregg91 wrote:
This is just a quick follow up on everything for those interested. Ebay made things right for both the buyer and I. Thank you, Trinton for looking at the case.

I am glad I found this forum because I doubt I would have seen the same resolve going through the standard case/ appeal process.

I read all of the comments in this thread. I suppose I have some reading to do about the selling process. I will also make sure to be very careful with the words I use in listing descriptions going forward.

There were a few responses inline with "don't sell dumpster items on Ebay". I think that depends on the item. If you look at Reconditioned 2008 Lexus IS 350 OEM HID headlights you will see that they are going for $300-600. New headlight units cost over $1000 per side. The one I listed probably needs 3 hours of work to get into decent recondintioned shape and it was listed for $55.

That is good news.