L.L. Bean dropping its unlimited returns policy

[lloydsteventaylor]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/whats-hot/ll-bean-dropping-its-unlimited-returns-policy/ar-BBIV1...

[godzilla_goose]

---

wrote:

Notice the reason for the restriction?  Because customers are abusing the generous offer beyond what is reasonable ... Americans are becoming far less honorable.

... I have an LL Bean Barn Jacket that I've worn so much that it is falling apart.  I have joked that if I were a total jerk, I could take that coat back to the store and get a brand new one with simply the comment "I'm not satisfied".

But I would never do that because it abuses the intent of their returns policy.  Unfortunately, a growing number of Americans don't agree - if there is a path to get something for free, then off they go to get it.  As eBay sellers, we know this dance all too well ...

---

@orangehound

ellis61,

When L.L. Bean is changing its store policies regarding returns, L.L. Bean is doing so to protect ITS financial interests (as it should). I also foresee many other American (and International) retail businesses doing similar things as the level of fraudulent returns negatively impacts their financial results. I surmise even Costco will take a hard look at its own return policy as I was quite surprised by the brazenness of one "customer" who returned a dead Christmas tree. . . .

Many, many, years ago up until 1993, I worked as an employee in the Transportation Department in a Canadian retail department store chain which sold "big ticket" items like furniture, appliances, bedding and which had a return policy similar to that of Sears, "If you're not satisfied, we will refund your money." We knew that there were < BLEEPY > buyers even back then. The store did NOT have "re-stocking fees" AND for a very, very long time during the business' existence, the stores did NOT have added delivery charges on big ticket items either.   (Later on, the stores did start charging $15 for delivery of big-ticket items but never had any re-stocking fees ever.)

So, what did those < BLEEPY > buyers do? Well, take the SuperBowl for instance. Back in the late 1980s, the buyer went into a store, bought a BIG-SCREEN 60" projection TV for $5,000 that weighed 400+ pounds and wanted it delivered. This retail business operated its own fleet of delivery vans and at one time, had over 200 employees in its Transportation Department. Delivering that "mother" was considered a 4-mall call. After the SuperBowl game, the store got a call from the customer saying that they wanted their money back because they "weren't happy with the TV". Well, the store had to send out a delivery van, again with 4-men, and picked up that "mother" and brought it back to the store. . . . You try and figure out how much money the store lost on that $5,000 "sale" to pay to operate a delivery van for 4 HOURS and wages for 4 employees delivering and picking up that "mother". . . .

OR, here's another favourite recollection of mine with the young couples that came into our stores and bought expensive $6,000 9-piece Dining Room Suites for their houses. Normally, these are 2-man calls unlike the delivery for the 400+ pound 60" projection TV. A 9-piece Dining Room Suite consists of a Buffet, Hutch, Table with 2 leaves, 4 side chairs and 2 arm chairs. Now, what do think happened?

These young couples had the stores deliver their 9-piece Dining Room Suites and after the weekend, the stores got calls . . . . I figure the young couples bought the furniture, had their friends over for fancy in-house dinner parties, and then called the stores to pick the furniture up and get ALL of their money back. To me, those "dirty calls" are 9-piece < BLEEPS > and the business took more big hits to its bottom line due to the abuse of some < BLEEPY > buyers.

When it became widely known that the store chain was going out of business in mid-1993, guess what happened then before the "tombstone arrived"?

More abusive buyers came out of the woodwork and called to have their three and four year old WORN OUT and STAINED upholstered furniture picked up for full refunds. Oh man, I could see (and smell) the FILTHY < BLEEP > that was brought back to our Distribution Centre . . . . I mean HOLY < BLEEP >!

[va4vi]

The theme from eBay cheerleaders is that "nothing can be done" to avoid buyer fraud.  And I find that kind of simple-minded for any business.  The good and innovative businesses will change, adapt and eliminate problems.  You mention eBay's 20 age - LL Bean is 106 years old... and made a change.  If comments on boards about LL Bean's return policy are any reflection of reality. it will not hurt their business.   IMO eBay is at the point where it must address this problem or become the failed business model after a good run. 

The higher-up's at eBay are supposed to be smart and innovative and problem solvers.  I'm a mere mortal who sells on eBay as a hobby, yet I can brainstorm the problem and come up with a few ideas.

 1.  Better screening of buyers.  It's a real problem how scammers rip-off and do it again under a new username.  Screen credit reports and buyer information to determine which buyers or sellers are likely to scam and cheat after the study.    So much is traceable today, and so much information on everybody is available today...  eBay needs to use the information that already exists to identify and define the problems sellers and buyers are facing due to fraud and act on it.

2.  Allow buyer negative feedback again.

3.  Start really looking into finding the truth when a dispute is opened instead of rubber stamping everything in favor of the buyer.  MANY methods do exist for revealing fraud... but eBay just ignores them.  Gold and silver are shipped in tamper-evident packaging and few claims of fraudulence appear in their feedback.  For some items, a photo of the item in a numbered tamper-proof bag before shipping should be able to be used when the buyer claiming a different item was sent.   UPC numbers and serial numbers are already unique and could be used in many ways.  Photos and serial numbers can and should be used for detecting truth.  Many sellers could and would invent many methods to detect scamming - but as it is now, eBay does not care about seller fraud and ignores any and all evidence.  Require buyers to present evidence (photos, UPC tag) too.  Many buyers return an item without even providing a photo of the alleged flaws or defects.

4. Reduce temptation of using eBay's return system by making one of the shipping costs non-refundable or a mandatory small restocking fee.  When the buyer has some skin in the game he is less likely to dishonestly use the "scot free" reasons for return eBay alone seems to provide. 

5. The big competitor is starting its own shipping.  Once that is established MANY scenarios exist for detecting fraud.  It was nice having individual couriers come after work hours and personally deliver items for me this holiday season.  Schedule deliveries, open items and inspect in front of the courier.  

6.  Eliminate returns on the high problem items or make a special category for them.  Buyer feedback alone for "clearance items - no returns" to police that category.  No retailers accept returns of CDs for example.

7.  Define return categories better.  eBay cheerleaders say nothing can be used to prove authenticity --  if so why have a category called "doesn't seem authentic" with seller paying all shipping?  Poor definition invites abuse.

8.  Beef-up eBay's customer service and resolution departments, and start considering buyer/seller history.  

These are just a few off the top of my head.  Many other sellers could add good ideas.  Yes, some of these suggestions would need to be tweaked, but simply ignoring this problem loses sellers who are also buyers.... and they tend to be the good ones.

[18704d]

"The theme from eBay cheerleaders is that "nothing can be done" to avoid buyer fraud."

-------

Can you please provide us with a list, of businesses who have no buyer fraud?

Thanks,

Lynn

[hioctane62]

---

wrote:

"The theme from eBay cheerleaders is that "nothing can be done" to avoid buyer fraud."

-------

Can you please provide us with a list, of businesses who have no buyer fraud?

Thanks,

Lynn

---

How about a list of businesses that do NOTHING to address buyer fraud.

1. Ebay

End of list.

[couldabeenworse]

What is startling to me is the amount of users who just spout out untruths before they actually go and read the policies.  At least I go and find the info and share it when I can.

I'd venture to say all the long-time boardies spent a lot of time quoting policies and are still very familiar with them.  But they are also familiar with how well eBay has implemented those policies over the years or decades, and don't believe everything eBay says.

Can you prove they are not doing what they say? 

Prove? No.  But I'll bet you can find a thousand threads where eBay takes action on a seller, ranging from a late shipment ding to a listing suspension to a permanant suspension.  It would be hard to find even a handful of such complaints from buyers, and when they do occur, it's always in dribs and drabs. 

[ted_200]

---

wrote:

In reply to Ted - I gave an example using the number 3 as we have no idea what criteria they use. But back at you - I've asked this before and haven't gotten any answers - what does a 3rd party venue do to eliminate the theives and scammers? 

You know it happens on every 3rd venue site and if not I'll happily provide you with the links to their forums. The only way anyone is within complete control of returns is if they have their own website and even then if a buyer does a CC chargeback - unless they've abused that and lost privileges - they will get their money back.

That is why even tho goodluck is correct on what he's posted - I don't feel personally it protects me as I've won the false SNAD cases and then received the CC chargeback that I lost. It is the price of doing business - but people don't realize that. Just as every B&M store has theft. If people are going to list high value items here - they have to be prepared for the deal to go south.

As far as not seeing threads of buyers that have been kicked off - I've seen multiple threads of buyers losing their MBG privileges - but think about it - how many people are really going to come to these boards to announce they've pulled off so many scams and they got caught - only the stupid ones and that's what we see. The same with sellers coming here complaining about being scammed and then we see they are selling fakes or listed an item as excellent condition and the thing doesn't work or isn't complete.

va - Ebay does has skin in the game as it was losing buyers as sellers wouldn't ship their items - shipped something other than what was described ect.. Ebay has been around for 20 years -  in that time we've seen stores like Sears/Kmart on the Brink, Macy's and JCP in the same position. Barnes & Nobles is gone as is well as many. All brand name stores that consumers shopped at for decades. There are more dot.coms that went under than I could even list and yet Ebay survives. That's  what MBA programs will be studying.

Good luck hitting it out on your own!  

---

I don't dispute a lot of what you're saying there.

But I think transparency is the secret sauce to deal with that, and specifically think that two way transparent feedback  (along with the Auction format) is what made eBay an 800 lb. gorilla in eCommerce using entirely 3rd party sellers, without them having any "protections" or "guarentees" at all. 

Loss of transparency (the masked bidder IDs) has been very damaging to the Auction format.  And while two way transaparent feedback was less than perfect at protecting users on the site, over time it is becoming apparent it was probably better at protecting users than eBay. 

I've asked this before and haven't gotten any answers - what does a 3rd party venue do to eliminate the theives and scammers? 

You shine the light of day on them.

[ted_200]

---

wrote:

"The theme from eBay cheerleaders is that "nothing can be done" to avoid buyer fraud."

-------

Can you please provide us with a list, of businesses who have no buyer fraud?

Thanks,

Lynn

---

There are none. 

But we get lost here when we start talking about other businesses (like Bean, or Sears, or Kmart) because "businesses" have a different problem to solve than a 3rd Party Selling site.  Bean KNOWS what it sent the buyer, and KNOWS the buyer sent back a rock.  eBay doesn't know anything, and that is why them getting involved in anything transactional becomes a probelm.   

[ozarkjoe]

Good for them.  I am more likely not to shop where they have generous return policies.  It is certain they are getting ripped off by unscrupulous grifters and that cost is passed on to the honest buyers.  I only return items within a few days of realizing it was the incorrect item or defective and that happens for about 1 purchase out of a 1000.

[godzilla_goose]

General reply as to what to do about abusive eBay buyers:

Having worked in retail, I do understand what brick-and-mortar businesses face when it comes to fraudulent activity and what they can do to try and deal with it. L.L. Bean has changed its long held return policy after seeing what has been happening to THEIR bottom line.

In MY opinion only, individual eBay sellers, be they individuals, mom-and-pop operations or established businesses with eBay as a segment of their overall business HAVE to decide for themselves what they can do to protect their OWN interests (as best as they can) IF they want to sell on this platform.

As far as I am concerned, eBay does what IT does in terms of policy changes to protects ITS own financial interests.

Considering exactly HOW eBay makes its revenues from its Marketplace segment, eBay makes tons of Final Value Fees on SALES. As such, for individual eBay sellers to try and maintain whatever level of profitability they have left, I can ONLY see prices of goods OVERALL rising without exception. There simply is NO other way.

eBay makes its Final Value Fees, for a lack of a better term, "passively" in that IF there is a sale, then a Final Value Fee is generated. Hopefully the buyers actually PAY the sellers so that sellers don't file to recover these Final Value Fees as credits since this negatively impacts eBay's bottom line.

I fully recognize that individual eBay sellers selling via an e-commerce platform (eBay among others) involve a THIRD party. The seller, the buyer and the platform provider are the three parties in a transaction. To me, platform providers are "passive" parties because they simply take a percentage of the SALES conducted between the ACTIVE parties -- the buyers and the sellers.

To me, these platform providers DON'T want to impede the FLOW of MONEY going to THEM and at the same time, by what eBay has done, tried to plug any "leakage" from its site in suspected off-eBay deals being formed or consummated BY the ACTIVE parties.

As far as I am concerned, eBay doesn't care if a buyer rips off a seller OR if a seller rips off a buyer (through shilling); eBay cares if IT is getting "ripped" off. Think about the eBay "Fee Avoidance Policy" to try and deal with sellers who listed things for 1¢ and charged $99.99 for shipping. When that didn't work, eBay changed its policy so that it calculates Final Value Fees on the Total Value of the sale including shipping. Think about the hidden bidder user IDs purportedly to protect the buyers from SPAM and phony Second Chance Offers. Think about monopolistic-type behaviour in insisting members use PayPal payments when eBay owned PayPal. Think about eBay now considering Adyen as another payment processor when its arrangement with PayPal (possibly) ends.

Sellers recognize that < BLEEPY > things are happening to them here and in the brick-and-mortar world. For the survival of retail business, be it brick-and-mortar OR online, frankly, I simply can see NO other realistic direction with respect to prices. ALL merchants are going to be raising their prices. AND, "passive" e-commerce sites are COUNTING on this happening. They stand to make MORE money simply because ALL merchants will have to raise prices in order to maintain their own levels of profitability.

Last post for today and I haven't slept all night or all morning either.

[cetgray88]

always the case that a few abusing the policy ruin it for all... 😞

[emerald40]

---

wrote:

Good for them.  I am more likely not to shop where they have generous return policies.  It is certain they are getting ripped off by unscrupulous grifters and that cost is passed on to the honest buyers.  I only return items within a few days of realizing it was the incorrect item or defective and that happens for about 1 purchase out of a 1000.

_______________________________________________

Are you talking about a B&M store or online.

With a B&M store the only things I have returned was electronic items in sealed boxes that did not work.

Or clothes, even though you read the tag thoroughy, when you washed them once, they fell apart. I have never returned for remorse.  And certainly not for bad fit as there are changing rooms to sort that out.

But online you are at the mercy of another person who wants money so he will tend to oversell his item.  And with clothes, I have no clue how others can buy them online unless it is the exact item you already have and know exactly how it will fit.

---

[lex-talon]

It's about time, lol. Imagine taking returns from items purchased years ago, ridiculous. 

[emerald40]

From what I heard some would buy jackets or boots for their kids, and when they outgrew them, they would exchange them for a bigger size.

[va4vi]

Does it ruin it for the rest of us if LL Bean changes its policy to avoid abuse? From what I can tell it will be the opposite. Prices could decrease if abuse is reduced that cuts into profits. And buyers (or at least judging from the comments) seem to have more respect for them for making this change. Most honest people don't like to see dishonesty and want to reduce it, not just for themselves but for everyone who is a victim of it. Many feel a society that does nothing to reduce/punish dishonesty, scams and fraud is detrimental to it overall. How many are willing to hold money for that deposed king of Nigeria in our personal bankaccount - just send him the routing number? Are you suspicious of everything coming out of Nigeria? Is anyone motivated to start a company in Nigeria?

[emerald40]

You can still return anything up to a year with the receipt.

IMO that is extremely, extremely generous.  You could not ask for more, and my family will continue to shop there.

I always thought the lifetime return policy was way too much and just invited unsavory people to take advantage.  And you are correct as we all payed for it in higher prices.