Item Not as Described Qualifications

[calntom]

Item Not as Described Qualifications

Your 'Item not as described' rate is the percentage of your transactions where buyers requested returns for the following reasons:

• Doesn't work or defective
• Doesn't match description or photos
• Wrong item sent
• Missing parts or pieces
• Arrived damaged
• Doesn't seem authentic

At least they put the other possible reasons of a return on top of the list. I suppose the other reasons do not add a defect as "Item Not as Described"

I think this is going to be a real downer for a lot of sellers as the buyer may choose to select a reason that fits the "Item Not as Described" bucket when indeed the return reason is one of the first five reasons offered. 

The extra 4% in FVF's is a real bite in the hind quarters. Another money grab for sure. I bet eBay will go after this full throttle, after all the money lost with the sales interruptions due to the "Lost Photos" and the "Sale Event" (Markdown Manager) debacles.  

[calntom]

I reckon I did not add my question to the original post:

When a buyer obviously picks the wrong reason for the return and it ends up as a "Item Not as Described" return, do we have to call into CS to get it reversed?

[fern*wood]

It is my understanding that ebay will no longer change the reason chosen even if it obviously incorrect.

[calntom]

@fern*wood

Found some information about this over on the Service Metrics & Shipping board.

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Service-Metrics-Shipping/Why-no-dispute-process-for-Buyers-remorse-SNA...

[fern*wood]

Sounds like one rep said one thing and the second rep stated another.

[fern*wood]

This is part of an email someone posted they received from ebay about a false SNAD.  If it is legit---it seems to state something different than the reps are saying.

"We are sorry to hear if the buyer selected the wrong return reason, requiring you to pay for return shipping. We recognize that this eats into your profits, and can certainly understand if the correct item was sent. However, that’s not something we can resolve. We encourage you to work directly with the buyer regarding this concern. Because this buyer set up the return as "Not as described" we honor the return as is. While the buyer may have ordered incorrectly, we will no longer be adjudicating returns when the fault may lie on the buyer. Moving forward, we will be remaining consistent with the return reason that was selected by the buyer, so with the return reason that was selected."

[calntom]

---

@fern*wood wrote:

Sounds like one rep said one thing and the second rep stated another.

---

That is the same as I gathered from that thread. They were stepping on each other....

[ten_o_nine]

"We are sorry to hear if the buyer selected the wrong return reason, requiring you to pay for return shipping. We recognize that this eats into your profits, and can certainly understand if the correct item was sent. However, that’s not something we can resolve. We encourage you to work directly with the buyer regarding this concern. Because this buyer set up the return as "Not as described" we honor the return as is. While the buyer may have ordered incorrectly, we will no longer be adjudicating returns when the fault may lie on the buyer. Moving forward, we will be remaining consistent with the return reason that was selected by the buyer, so with the return reason that was selected."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Funniest thing I heard today. Thank you.