Seller protection

[naha_478]

From what I have read on these forums a seller has no recourse when a buyer lies about the condition of a received item. In this case we’re out $390 because the buyer initiated a dispute, even though we offered to refund their money once we got the item back, won the dispute, eBay debited our account without the buyer sending back the item and will do nothing about, some of their CSR’s even lied to us about refunding the money. I have never witnessed such a blatant violation of good business practices! Anyone ever get eBay to actually refund their money? 

[mtgraves7984]

"In this case we’re out $390 because the buyer initiated a dispute, even though we offered to refund their money once we got the item back..."

@naha_478 

If you were willing to refund, you should have approved the Return request that the buyer initiated. Then, you wouldn't have had to refund until you recieved your item back.

I don't see that eBay will refund you the money you had to refund your buyer. Why would you suspect eBay might?

[fern*wood]

Why did ebay get involved?

[monica-sells]

I have had a return recently, and received the item back before issuing a refund, at which time the associated fees were also credited to my account.

Did you follow the return protocols that ebay offers you?

[coolections]

Did you do exactly what Ebay told you to do. Once the buyer initiated the dispute you were suppose OK the return. Ebay would have told you to send the buyer a return label within a certain time period. Did you do all that?

[dentalsales4u]

Did the buyer open a return or file a credit card dispute?

[stainlessenginecovers]

Sounds like the buyer opened a Charge Back with their Bank; eBay, like any other entity, cannot fight these (much) and the Bank issuing the Charge Back is the deciding entity. This is an agreement that all vendors must abide by if they want to accept bank cards (Visa, Amex, MC etc.) 

[m60driver]

And I quote myself, from just two hours ago, from another thread noting a similar situation.

"The buyer saw that you had not sold anything in at least a year and then listed a somewhat expensive computer.  So of course you attracted a scammer.  The fault with Ebay was they allowed you, and countless other new/infrequent sellers in the past, to list such an item.  They have the data and capability to prevent or at least warn such sellers when they list a highly scammed item, but they don't.  And that is to Ebay's everlasting shame."

And the beat goes on.

[kabilab]

johpa opines--The fault with Ebay was they allowed you, and countless other new/infrequent sellers in the past, to list such an item.

kabilab disagrees--Being an octogenarian, I am from an era when people accepted responsibility for their actions.

johpa continues--They have the data and capability to prevent or at least warn such sellers when they list a highly scammed item, but they don't.

kabilab agrees--Such a consideration would be a welcome gesture for e-Bay; it would certainly alleviate problems.

Fiannly, johpa states--And that is to Ebay's everlasting shame."

kabilab's opinion--This IS business, not a personal exercise!

[albertabrightalberta]

---

@naha_478 wrote:

From what I have read on these forums a seller has no recourse when a buyer lies about the condition of a received item. In this case we’re out $390 because the buyer initiated a dispute, even though we offered to refund their money once we got the item back, won the dispute, eBay debited our account without the buyer sending back the item and will do nothing about, some of their CSR’s even lied to us about refunding the money. I have never witnessed such a blatant violation of good business practices! Anyone ever get eBay to actually refund their money? 

---

I'm confused about what you said. If you won the dispute, why did ebay debit your account? 

When the buyer opened the NAD return request, how did you respond? Did you respond to the case and supply the return shipping label? or did you just email the buyer promising a refund upon receipt of the return? 

If the former and the buyer didn't return it, you would get the case closed in your favor.

If the latter, you didn't actually accept the return (per policy) and the buyer escalated, got the refund and a free computer. 

[fab_finds4u]

When you said you would refund when it was returned I bet you didn't provide a return label or send them shipping money to return it, did you?

You needed to do that within 3 days. If you don't  eBay steps in and refunds and tells the buyer they don't have to return it.  When your policy is returns accepted sometimes eBay will automatically step in and provide a return label. 

Saying to return it for a refund doesn't  get your laptop back if you didn't  provide a return label. 

And it is terrible some buyers lie. I think some buyes are professional scam artists.  They purposely look for a seller with  zero feedback and no returns. They hope you will make a rookie mistake like not providing a return label or saying sorry I don't  accept returns and they end up with a free item.

Sorry this was an expensive lesson.  

[ittybitnot]

Saying to return it for a refund doesn't  get your laptop back if you didn't  provide a return label. 

@fab_finds4u 

This sounds like a "Payment Dispute" instead of an eBay claim.  There is no way to provide a return label (or fund a return) until the buyer files an "eBay claim".   As of this writing, the OP has not made it clear.  

A return is not required for a buyer who bypasses eBay and goes directly to their card, in order to get reimbursed through the seller's proceeds. 

[simba6]

Yep. Never sell an item you can't afford to lose.

[buyselljack2016]

we’re out $390 because the buyer initiated a dispute, even though we offered to refund their money once we got the item back, won the dispute,

__________________________________________________________

not completely clear, but I read it as "buyer won"

[retro_entertainment_collectibles]

---

@stainlessenginecovers wrote:

Sounds like the buyer opened a Charge Back with their Bank; eBay, like any other entity, cannot fight these (much) and the Bank issuing the Charge Back is the deciding entity. This is an agreement that all vendors must abide by if they want to accept bank cards (Visa, Amex, MC etc.) 

---

Its actually the aggregate processor, Ayden I think they are called.  I had a merchant account and we won nine of ten chargebacks thereabouts.  PayPal also a processor and hence why when a consumer issue dispute PayPal was the arbiter.  Banks on either side of a transaction be biased as would merchant account providers so its the aggregate or "backend processor" that settles claims or at least that was the case with our EMS account which had Wells Fargo as the backend processor and with Card Service they had a completely independent unit vs merchant provisioning unit.