Selling options use SHIP address logic, but FEE logic uses Registration address logic?

[chris13]

Some top notch posters inadvertently hijacked a thread that I would like to continue in a proper context.

@kathiec re: As for the use of a freight fowarder causing problems, exactly what problems would those be? 

Background: I learned today that use of 'USA' in a buyers info & shipping address legitimately can represent a freight forwarder being used that should be 'no problem' for a seller, even if I have set my listing to not support international sales which translates to "not shipping to a non-US address" I am told.

How can you prevent buyers registered in another c... - The eBay Community

(quote from that thread)

"buyers who are registered in another country but use a US ship to address can still buy your item. You do not find out until the sale is complete and you look at your payout details and this is what you see:

(This is MY unexpected charge for a US sale for an item marked 'no international shipping', not from post above)

International Fee

Charged because the buyer’s registered address is in Japan. Final amount: $290.00. -$4.79

Rate$290.00x1.65% =-$4.79

I would suggest that when I specify no International shipping, and as you point out I am NOT shipping internationally, that being charged an International Fee is in fact a problem when it is something I have intended to prevent and cannot predict as an expense.

Fees use 'registered address' but policies use 'shipping address' <<< This is poor policy logic

I understand completely there is overhead for a foreign currency transaction, but this transaction is one that is between eBay and the BUYER by permitting freight forwarding and not allowing any reasonable way to prevent the charge except onerous workaround of snooping a buyer after a sale and cancelling an order.

OK, got that off my chest. Fire away and tell me how I am wrong on this one.

Best wishes.

[dbfolks166mt]

The political climate of foreign countries, NATO sanctions and circumventions, any and all of that falls outside our responsibility as sellers, however if you wish to take on this responsibility then ebay may not be the platform for you to sell on. Quite disagree and I still find eBay to be a viable platform for me to sell on as I have for years. I consider myself to be a business just like any other business and like other businesses I do my best to align with national policy and the current sanctions. 

Our responsibility as sellers is to get the package to the buyer's ship to address.

Once the package arrives at the buyer's ship to address, our responsibility ends. From a delivery perspective maybe not from a financial one. More than one seller has been burned by a chargeback from a foreign buyer  where the item went through a FF and the eBay MBG policy means NOTHING to the CC company. Bottom line it's my merchandise and my risk until eBay puts a policy in place similar to what they are attempting to do under EIS that better covers the seller. 

When it comes to FF's it works to our advantage, if you are familiar with the INAD/INR process then you would know the buyer loses all purchase protection schemes by using the FF.  I am quite familiar with the NAD/INR process and how it works, or doesn't . The buyer only looses MBG under eBay policy and at times that is questionable based on a number of comments by the blues. Repeat that policy means NOTHING to a CC company when processing a chargeback. 

Other than the little 2% fee I fail to understand why we're taking these issues to the nth degree.

We're not helping matters by overthinking these things. While the 2% has always been an annoyance the topic of FF's has been an ongoing discussion for YEARS and will without doubt continue to be so. 

     I am going to assume that this is a posting ID since it's only been active since 2/26/23 and you have nothing listed and have sold nothing on this account. 

[pburn]

Willingness or unwillingness to violate this or any other of eBay's policies is up to you. I prefer to remain in compliance with eBay's policies. I feel I can't give credible advice to others--whether buyers or sellers--who violate any of eBay's policies if I'm doing it, too. I wouldn't feel good about commenting on another member's violation of "X" policy if I'm violating "Y" policy myself. But that's just me. 🤷‍♀️

I feel it would be disingenuous to tell another poster s/he has violated eBay policy regarding nonpayment, for example, if I've just violated the cancellation policy ten minutes before. It's inappropriate, IMO, to pick and choose which of eBay's policies I'll follow and then comment on others for not following policies.

We can agree to disagree on this subject.

Again, "articles on the internet" or "friends that work for government organizations . . . that say it is pretty much a fact" would have no impact on eBay's policies or whether a seller should comply with said policy.

[chris13]

kyle@ebay 

Coffee another day, perhaps.

It would be nice if the policy was something that support staff was trained to communicate. Your support agent, unprompted, actually suggested this as a course of action (cancellation)

We rely on consistency when leveraging support services.

(paste from my chat transcription at point of sale)

05:09:07UTC chris13

I didnt realize that ebay allowed a user whose acct says 'Japan' to specify a US address. Never encountered this before

05:10:17UTC Harprit

You can complete the sale, however if you are not comfortable in proceeding further, you may cancel the order.

[dbfolks166mt]

Willingness or unwillingness to violate this or any other of eBay's policies is up to you. I prefer to remain in compliance with eBay's policies. I feel I can't give credible advice to others--whether buyers or sellers--who violate any of eBay's policies if I'm doing it, too. I wouldn't feel good about commenting on another member's violation of "X" policy if I'm violating "Y" policy myself. But that's just me. 

     There has always been this disconnect with regards to FF between seller intentions and the eBay policy that has lingered in the gray area for a LONG time. I have shipped orders through freight forwarders but I refuse either from personal reasons or risk to sell/ship to some countries and had my exclusion list set in my listings when I sold internationally. 

I feel it would be disingenuous to tell another poster s/he has violated eBay policy regarding nonpayment, for example, if I've just violated the cancellation policy ten minutes before. It's inappropriate, IMO, to pick and choose which of eBay's policies I'll follow and then comment on others for not following policies.  Agree with you in that regard. However in accordance with the listing policy and the tools provided eBay has given me the ability to exclude countries that I will not ship to but the current algorithm does not look at the shipping from end to end it only looks at the seller to the FF leg and therefore leaves a gray area gap with regards to my preferences which are inline with eBay posting policies. 

We can agree to disagree on this subject. Agree

Again, "articles on the internet" or "friends that work for government organizations . . . that say it is pretty much a fact" would have no impact on eBay's policies or whether a seller should comply with said policy.

Ironically when the sanctions were put in place eBay automatically put the Russian Federation and the Ukraine into every US sellers list but it does not stop Russian buyers from using FF's to get around that restriction. So eBay is basically in the same boat with regards to the exclusion settings and the FF workaround. 

[yuzuha]

---

@dbfolks166mt wrote:

More than one seller has been burned by a chargeback from a foreign buyer  where the item went through a FF and the eBay MBG policy means NOTHING to the CC company.

---

I'm honestly not seeing your point. A domestic buyer can do a chargeback just as easily as a foreign one and the outcome will be exactly the same.

[dbfolks166mt]

@dbfolks166mt wrote:

More than one seller has been burned by a chargeback from a foreign buyer  where the item went through a FF and the eBay MBG policy means NOTHING to the CC company.

I'm honestly not seeing your point. A domestic buyer can do a chargeback just as easily as a foreign one and the outcome will be exactly the same.

     Fully understand that anyone can do a chargeback. The issue comes into play where under the MBG the sellers responsibility ends once the item is delivered to the FF. In the case of a chargeback for NAD or INR to the final destination the eBay MBG and seller protection means NOTHING when the CC is determining the outcome, which as you state will be the same. But it does however void what eBay claims to be seller protection under the MBG and FF delivery. 

[kyle@ebay]

---

@chris13 wrote:

kyle@ebay 

Coffee another day, perhaps.

It would be nice if the policy was something that support staff was trained to communicate. Your support agent, unprompted, actually suggested this as a course of action (cancellation)

We rely on consistency when leveraging support services.

(paste from my chat transcription at point of sale)

05:09:07UTC chris13

I didnt realize that ebay allowed a user whose acct says 'Japan' to specify a US address. Never encountered this before

05:10:17UTC Harprit

You can complete the sale, however if you are not comfortable in proceeding further, you may cancel the order.

---

Hey @chris13 thanks for bringing this up.  While certainly you can cancel any sale (though not without potential repercussions) it's disappointing to hear you were not provided the proper context that goes along with this option.  You can check out our help page here to see more info surrounding cancellations. 

[pjcdn2005]

When there is a chargeback or MBG claim for an item not received, ebay will cover the seller if there is delivery confirmation to the address that the buyer gave when making payment.  That's true if delivery is to a FF or to the buyer's home address.  I'm sure that I've posted that info from the help pages to you before so I won't bother posting it again.

[yuzuha]

---

@dbfolks166mt wrote:

     Fully understand that anyone can do a chargeback. The issue comes into play where under the MBG the sellers responsibility ends once the item is delivered to the FF. In the case of a chargeback for NAD or INR to the final destination the eBay MBG and seller protection means NOTHING when the CC is determining the outcome, which as you state will be the same. But it does however void what eBay claims to be seller protection under the MBG and FF delivery. 

---

eBay has never protected sellers for NAD chargebacks because they don't know what the seller sent or what the buyer received. The only ones you have ever been protected against are INR and unauthorized use chargebacks, which will always be found in your favor as long as you provide evidence showing that you shipped to the address on the transaction (and in the case of an INR, showing that it was delivered to that address).

The CC company will find the same thing. If I purchase an item and have it shipped to my Japanese reshipper and then do an INR chargeback because it got lost between Japan and the US, they will look at the transaction details and see that it was delivered to the address on the order. What happens to it after that is not their issue as long as it arrives where I had it sent when I ordered it and they will not refund me if the transaction details are showing that it was delivered.

[chris13]

kyle@ebay  I have read that and in fact quoted it in this thread.

The specifics of this emphasized text area are exactly what caused me to think that when a listing is NOT using Authentication or EIS options, that cancelling for a reason of 'Problem with Address' is in fact both allowed and appropriate.

Can you point me to the specifics of when that reason IS allowed? It merely states when it isnt. Or at least I cant seem to find it. Thanks for your continued help with this issue.

The "Issue with buyer's address" reason is no longer available to sellers when canceling orders for items sold through Authenticity Guarantee or eBay international standard delivery programs.

[buyselljack2016]

When it comes to FF's it works to our advantage, if you are familiar with the INAD/INR process then you would know the buyer loses all purchase protection schemes by using the FF.

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

If only that were so, it would be a wonderful thing.

[pburn]

---

@chris13 wrote:

Can you point me to the specifics of when that reason IS allowed? It merely states when it isnt. Or at least I cant seem to find it. Thanks for your continued help with this issue.

---

Here are a few I can think of:

1. Buyer contacts sellers and says the wrong address was used at checkout. (Seller must, of course, confirm it's the actual buyer, etc.)
2. Buyer inadvertently purchases "local pickup" item listing and agrees local pickup is not feasible.
3. Buyer uses a post office box but carrier policy prohibits delivery to a post office box.
4. Buyer has used an address that is rejected when preparing a label, and seller cannot reach buyer in order to obtain the correct street address.

I'm sure there are other legitimate reasons for using that option that I'm overlooking.

[dbfolks166mt]

eBay has never protected sellers for NAD chargebacks because they don't know what the seller sent or what the buyer received. The only ones you have ever been protected against are INR and unauthorized use chargebacks, which will always be found in your favor as long as you provide evidence showing that you shipped to the address on the transaction (and in the case of an INR, showing that it was delivered to that address).

     There is a difference with a NAD eBay case and a NAD chargeback. While the seller is not protected under either scenario where the eBay case and the chargeback divest is when it comes to the sellers options in responding to a NAD. The seller has the option under an eBay case, which is some minimal protection, to have the item returned depending on how they respond to the eBay case according to the defined policies. With a NAD chargeback regardless of whether it went through a FF the eBay policy with regards to the sellers options on the return of the item are void and mean nothing to the CC company and the seller is unlikely to ever get the item back if they loose the chargeback. 

The CC company will find the same thing. If I purchase an item and have it shipped to my Japanese reshipper and then do an INR chargeback because it got lost between Japan and the US, they will look at the transaction details and see that it was delivered to the address on the order. What happens to it after that is not their issue as long as it arrives where I had it sent when I ordered it and they will not refund me if the transaction details are showing that it was delivered.

You would be incorrect on this one. The CC company will look at the delivered address which will be the FF's and see that it does NOT match the buyers address in Japan that is associated with their CC and refund the buyer. I have experienced this firsthand although it was not an eBay order. 

[dbfolks166mt]

When there is a chargeback or MBG claim for an item not received, ebay will cover the seller if there is delivery confirmation to the address that the buyer gave when making payment.  That's true if delivery is to a FF or to the buyer's home address.  I'm sure that I've posted that info from the help pages to you before so I won't bother posting it again.

You have and I know how to find that information. That means NOTHING to the CC company. 

[yuzuha]

---

@dbfolks166mt wrote:

     There is a difference with a NAD eBay case and a NAD chargeback. While the seller is not protected under either scenario where the eBay case and the chargeback divest is when it comes to the sellers options in responding to a NAD. The seller has the option under an eBay case, which is some minimal protection, to have the item returned depending on how they respond to the eBay case according to the defined policies.

---

Is that new? I've never heard of that being an option before. Everything I've ever heard about NAD chargebacks from people who have received them is that you're basically hosed because there is no protection against those.

You would be incorrect on this one. The CC company will look at the delivered address which will be the FF's and see that it does NOT match the buyers address in Japan that is associated with their CC and refund the buyer. I have experienced this firsthand although it was not an eBay order. 

---

I have a very difficult time believing that when literally every shopping/ecommerce site allows you to input separate billing and shipping addresses. Did they file an INR, or was it an unauthorized use chargeback? Because if the rule was that the shipping address had to match the billing address, anyone who has more than one residence or who ordered a gift to be shipped directly to someone could just indiscriminately file INR cases and win by default as the shipping address wouldn't match the billing address.