OP, I strongly suggest that you appeal this decision: Just like this:
Appeal of SNAD case Decision: REF: Auction listing #_________________.
To Whom It May Concern:
I am disputing your case decision ref case #_________ for the following reasons:
1. Per eBay User Agreement. Under Section: Policy Enforcement, it states: When a buyer or seller issue arises, we may consider the users’ performance history and the specific circumstances in applying our policies. We may choose to be more lenient with policy enforcement in an effort to do the right thing for both buyers and sellers.
Here are some aspects of this dispute, which require “considering”, or, more aptly, “reconsideration” at this point:
- This buyer has a total FB score of 62, compared to my lengthy and stellar selling history and performance. Please look at my successfully completed listings for similar HVAC parts. The parts are all new and unused. Why would I, all of the sudden, send a buyer a used, broken motor? I would not and I did not send this buyer a blown furnace motor. I sent him precisely the exact motor as shown in the listing with very clear pictures including a picture of the unique MFG serial number assigned to that motor.
In his SNAD return request, this buyer proffered blatantly false evidence to support his claim. He provided pictures of the supposedly broken motor, pictures, which show a completely different motor with a different serial number.
When one Google's this "Buyer files false Snad and then sends used, broken item back", 1,350,000 results show up in 7.3 seconds! This is a well-known and frequently perpetrated fraud, which this buyer played out perfectly, while you, eBay, turned a blind eye.
2. Your CS agent asserted that eBay “gives the buyer the benefit of the doubt”. I am unable to find this provision, in this specific vernacular, anywhere in your user agreement. Please show me where this clause: “eBay gives the buyer the benefit of the doubt” is written in the Policy Section? It is not written anywhere. Is it one of your “secret” off the books, unwritten rules? Inquiring minds want to know. Moreover, millions of faithful, honest eBay sellers want to know and deserve to know the answer. Your apparent unwritten axiom: “eBay “gives the buyer the benefit of the doubt” is literally driving off your best and oldest sellers in veritable droves. Your abject complicity in outright fraud is reprehensible.
To refresh the aspects of this case here is the abridged sequence of events:
- Buyer demands some money back....a partial refund. I denied that request.
- Buyer then threatens my feedback score if I refused to give him a partial refund.
- I suggested to Buyer that he Open a Case.
- Buyer opens a case and left negative feedback.
- I contact eBay CS agent and feedback was removed.
- Buyer Opens SNAD case, requesting a “Partial Refund”. I denied
- Buyer escalates case, requests total refund. I deny.
NOTE: In the interim, I spent approximately 6 hours on the phone discussing the veracity of this SNAD dispute with a quartet of eBay CS agents. On four (4) of these calls, I was repeatedly assured that I would “win the dispute based on my detailed photos and further, in his claim, buyer has offered pictures showing a different serial number than what I sent.”
8. Dispute decided in favor of the Buyer and he can just “send the broken part back".
9. I immediately contact eBay CS and spoke to a “supervisor” who enlightened/informed me that:
a. My performance history as a seller and feedback/DSRs are inconsequential and of no importance in deciding a case.
b. All case decisions are merited by the information of the disputed sale only.
c. My return history as a seller is “meaningless”.
So how can this be? Either this supervisor was sorely misinformed or just simply unaware of this written policy: eBay User Agreement. Under Section: Policy Enforcement, it states: When a buyer or seller issue arises, we may consider the users’ performance history and the specific circumstances in applying our policies. We may choose to be more lenient with policy enforcement in an effort to do the right thing for both buyers and sellers.
More succinctly, in light of this written policy, please explain to me how this case was decided in this buyer’s favor when my seller longevity, history, and seller performance were not even factored into the decision.
Leniency was bestowed no doubt. It was given to a “buyer” of questionable repute, instead of me, a seller with a long-standing, honorable proven record. My history speaks for itself.
This buyer’s history is short and scant, at best: He tried to extort a partial refund the first time by threatening me with negative feedback. He then carried out that threat by leaving me negative feedback. Two calls later to your esteemed CS department the negative feedback was removed. Buyer then opened a SNAD case, again requesting a “Partial refund”, which I denied. Buyer then requests, you, eBay to step in and now wants a “full refund”. He is now going for the whole shebang, getting his money back and keeping the good part. Full-Tilt scam. Take a note: from this point forward, “Seller” now = “Scammer”.
By the way, the "esteemed" eBay CS agents whom I spoke with, all of whom had unfettered access to the email communications between me and this seller could clearly read the words written between us.
Now, my question is this: Could these CS agents understand and tease out the implied threats via the obvious pugnacious tenor of this seller’s emails? Could they not discern this buyer’s obvious endgame i.e. Successful eBay scam? Apparently not... These "esteemed" eBay CS agents chose to ignore the fact that this scammer’s pictures, which he sent in support of his fraudulent SNAD claim, bore absolutely no resemblance to the original pictures in the listing. Not even the same serial number. They chose to ignore his futile attempts at garnering a “partial refund”. Either your "esteemed "CS agents are all disabled and ambulate around with red-tipped white canes, or they are brainwashed to repeat and live by this Mantra: “eBay gives the buyer the benefit of the doubt”. Once again, where is this written in your eBay User Policies? It is not written anywhere. So tell me, how did this decision on my dispute result in this scammer getting a refund? He is not going to send that pristine NEW furnace motor back to me. To think otherwise, is just outright delusional.
He likely will not send anything at all. Are you paying attention here? Whoever made the final decision in this case, well that person is in need of some serious, intensive re-training. Or maybe not... The only thing that your “esteemed “CS agents apparently need to know, above all else, is this: “eBay gives the buyer the benefit of the doubt”…plus this addendum: Ignore any evidence to the contrary, the BUYER always prevails. This is how eBay rolls nowadays.
Now, let me address a few other written eBay BEST BUYER POLICIES that this scammer has unquestionably VIOLATED:
PER eBay Policy: If a buyer reports that an item is not as described
If the buyer starts a return request because an item is not as described in the listing, and then asks us to step in and help, you may be protected from losing a case if you provide clear documentation that the item was described accurately and consistently in the listing. This documentation can include photos of the item that you upload to eBay during the returns process.
I provided clear documentation and pictures of the item I sold. In his bogus SNAD claim, this scammer provided pictures of his old, broken furnace motor. Serial numbers DO NOT match. Do you understand this fact? Does my seller history reflect that I have ever sent a buyer a broken part? Ever? No. This begs the question: Have you even initiated a forescic investigation of this Scammer's history? MBG abuser is my best guess.
Buying practices policy: Violations of this policy may result in a range of actions, including Feedback removal.
Pretty clear and undisputed that this Scammer has violated this policy. The negative feedback was removed.
Buying behaviors, we don't allow:
Making unreasonable demands:
We don't allow unreasonable or excessive demands. We also consider using the threat of negative Feedback, low detailed seller ratings, or opening eBay Money Back Guarantee requests as a way to make demands of the seller to be extortion and we don't allow it.
Bingo, check mark, Ding, Ding, Ding. Winner, winner, chicken dinner! This buyer gets the Grand Prize here.
Not allowed:
Demanding a partial refund or discount not covered by the original listing or the eBay Money Back Guarantee under threat of negative Feedback, low detailed seller ratings, or opening an eBay Money Back Guarantee request or PayPal Purchase Protection case.
Check, check and check x 3. Three KFC chicken dinners for this scammer OK.
Abusing the buyer protection programs
Not allowed:
Claiming an item isn't as described in the listing when the item condition is consistent with the listing description
- Threatening to open an eBay Money Back Guarantee request or PayPal Purchase Protection case against a seller in order to get a discount or additional goods and services, when the item arrived in the described condition
This is EXACTLY what this Scammer proceeded to do. Read the email communication. It is clear and undisputable.
Opening an eBay Money Back Guarantee request or PayPal Purchase Protection case:
- Threatening to open an eBay Money Back Guarantee request or PayPal Purchase Protection case against a seller in order to get a discount or additional goods and services, when the item arrived in the described condition
Not to belabor the point, but: This is EXACTLY what this Scammer proceeded to do. Read the email communications and read the Sequence of Events outlined. It is clear and undisputable.
Returning a different item (for example, a used or older model of the same product or an empty box)
If you really think and/or believe that I am going to get my NEW furnace motor back from this Scammer, well then, I have some oceanfront property in Arizona that I can sell you at a real bargain. I will even list it on eBay for you. A real deal. Yea, right.
In summary, I am asking you, eBay, to reconsider your decision in this case. I have provided you a plethora of evidence in my favor, while this scammer has provided you nothing but falsified evidence in the form of pictures showing his “old, used part”. Compare our eBay historical data.
Once again, I remind you of this policy:
eBay User Agreement. Under Section: Policy Enforcement, it states: When a buyer or seller issue arises, we may consider the users’ performance history and the specific circumstances in applying our policies. We may choose to be more lenient with policy enforcement in an effort to do the right thing for both buyers and sellers.
Sincerely,
pam
