Returns and the new policy, fun twist

[terrycanarsky]

Monday, we had a buyer contact us and say that the item we shipped in June was not the same thing as what he'd ordered.  He realized that he was a bit late, but he'd been out of town for the month and not opened the package until the past Saturday.  Please send a prepaid label and refund him in full.

Uh, no.

I responded that I was sorry, but we'd shipped at the end of June, he'd received the item on July 2, and it was now well past the return window according to both our policy and eBay.  After his second message, pretty much reiterating what he'd said in the first, I called Merchant Support.   As this buyer was adamant on a refund (not unpleasant, just assertive), this felt like it could be a returns case in the making. 

According to eBay policy, if the buyer opened a case such as this, well past the 30 day mark, it would be closed in our favor.  But it would still count as a defect against us in the new seller metrics.  The MSR actually did her research on the question (would it count) and had to call back --- because the policy makers at eBay had apparently never considered a situation such as this.

Luckily, after I requested the buyer to send a photo of the item he received since the part number he gave (as the incorrect part he got) was not something we even had in our database, least of all listed, he wrote back with multiple apologies.  The incorrect item had actually come from another seller, and there was a problem.  What he got from us was fine.

Lesson from the story:  Even when it's not a seller's fault, it's the seller's fault.   Perpetually the seller's fault.  No big surprise to most of us who've been slogging through the more recent eBay shenanigans.

~M

[calistas_closet33]

i agree, they cannot make money except off of bullying sellers, punishing, demanding more and more money and offering less protection..how do they think this will end? 

[calistas_closet33]

Sellers need to not finance ebay’s inability to grow the platform in other ways that don’t include pilfering more money off sellers.. ideally everyone should prosper under a proper business model.

[terrycanarsky]

Contacting a seller through eBay but outside the official returns process should not trigger anything.  Not to say there isn't a hidden bug in the system that would cause such nonsense, but it shouldn't.

This buyer contacted us.  When it was apparent that he was not understanding about a 30 days return policy being 30 days regardless of his being out of town for those days or not, I contacted eBay to ascertain what our options were IF he decided to file a case.

I was told that IF he filed a case - and yes, it can be done, yippee for stellar programming ( /sarcasm) - the case would be closed in our favor based upon the fact it was over 30 days (our policy matchs eBay's in time).  When I asked if the filing of a NAD, even though it was clearly outside the MBG time limit, would be counted against us in the new seller metrics system, the rep did not know and promised to research and call back.  She did so, and sounded rather aghast and resigned that the answer was yes, the case - though filed well outside eBay's policy time limit and automatically closed in our favor accordingly - would be held against the account under the new metrics system.  Again, stellar programming.

I suppose the only good thing about all this is that she did state that these are the early days - and if things like this caused enough trouble, it was likely the policy would be looked at more closely and adjusted.  So, if anything stupid like this happens to you, SPEAK UP to Merchant Support, Customer Support, the blues here, anyone who may be able to get the word out.  If you sit on your hands and depend on someone else to fix the problem, you are likely to be sorely disappointed and out of luck.

~M

[hillbillymedia]

**general comment*

If Ebays "account specialists" are trained as good as their Customer service reps we are all in big trouble. Our cases might as well be decided by bots.

[terrycanarsky]

When a buyer opens a NAD or INR it is just a request.  Requests allow sellers to work with buyers to resolve any issues before the request gets escalated into a case.  A case is where both parties have given eBay permission to make a decision on behalf of both parites. 

Very different events and every sellers has control to resolve an issue before it turns into a case.

I agree, semantics are important.  That is why what you say is theoretically correct but functionally wrong.

Messaging a seller outside the Returns system is simply sending a message stating there is a problem.  The issue is that many buyers simply hit the button "Return this Item" button that eBay has so prominently displayed.  THAT kicks it over to the equivalent of a "case".

If a buyer submits a "request" for return due to NAD, it is counted against the seller regardless of whether it is erroneous, negotiated, resolved, escalated, or returned.  Period.  The end result is eBay charging an additional 4% FVF atop of dropping seller status. 

If a buyer submits a "request" due to INR, it is counted against the seller regardless of whether it is erroneous, negotiated, resolved, or escalated.  Period.  The end result is eBay tacking on an extension on your estimated delivery times, again regardless of reality, which will likely result in lower sales because the buyer only sees the dates, not the fictional reasons.

~M

[awishingwell]

"The incorrect item had actually come from another seller, and there was a problem. "

Over the years I have heard this exact same excuse when requesting a photo -  seems to be the scammers way out of their messy attempt to extort funds from unsuspecting sellers. Not sure how many fall for it but I always ask the scammers for a picutre befre anything happens.  Funny I've never got a photo yet - just a scammer going away

[no-plain-white-envelopes]

Yes, they will try at every chance to do a return. I had a sale in early May. Buyer tried to force a return 37 days later. He lost . Then he tried to file paypal 7 days later . Buyer lost again. They will try and try and try. You have to stand fast.

[zamo-zuan]

---

@tunicaslot wrote:

According to the blues - what is counting against a seller that may determine they receive an increase in their FVFs is any opened requests for SNAD - not all returns. But to me this is problematic as even tho I had a false SNAD closed in my favor - it still counts against me because the buyer opened the req as an SNAD.

I asked - with knowing how many false returns sellers receive - something like this could be counted and was told - they know this happens and it's been figured into the formula - which I find hard to believe knowing the high rate of SNAD returns alone in clothes because a buyer does not want to pay return shipping - but whatever.

That's why people should not have all their eggs in one basket!

---

I can basically guarantee the "Peers" being calculated in the returns and SNAD section are using information for peers that is not fair to the sellers.

I am confident that right now, "Peers" are every single seller who has sold in the category, even if it's just one item they sold and that was it.

For our store, we have our own in-house software that will create us a visual confirmation list of every item that needs to be packed. This makes sure every item going in to the box is verified. This is a two step process where two different employees review the item.

It's almost impossible for us to make mistakes in what is in the box. The only true SNAD we have is if someone on our listing team made a mistake, and since we have been selling for years, that is extremely uncommon at this point.

We also use free returns. Which means less sellers lie and claim SNAD for free shipping. The SNAD percentage drops signfiicantly once you turn on Free Returns.

Despite this, our service metrics page still claims we are "high" at 1.14% and "average for peers" is 0.64%.

If "Peers" are anyone who has 1/2 or even 1/4 of the amount of orders we process, I can guarantee this number will be a lot higher than what they are claiming.

As mentioned, it's almost impossible for true SNAD's to happen with our software. There's not much more we could do to guarantee the correct item is shipped.

Also, any of our partners who don't use free returns are finding themselves in the "very high" area. So I feel for every seller who isn't using free returns.

This is why I am extremely confident when I say, the peers calculation can not possibly be accurate. The only way it makes sense that return rate could be so low is if they are calculating sellers without more than 100 transactions a month.

"Peers" defines as other sellers with equivalency to us. These numbers are not indicative of equivalent sellers. We network with those sellers equivalent to us. They are doing worse than us.