cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

It could be a pivotal case that really has the folks at eBay coming up with these terrible ideas to reverse course. 

 

About me: 

I'm an infrequent seller (I generally sell higher value items from our personal items). Maybe 10-20 sales a year. At face-value, I am the target demographic in advertisements to use this platform to sell items? Sell your used items, isn't that the pitch? High-end items nonetheless. Well, I take sparkling photos, write informative descriptions and I'm very reasonable overall about how I engage and work with buyers. I am by all accounts the perfect seller. Also, an eBay member for maybe 15 years. 

 

The result of what you’re about to read: 

A self-inflicted wound for eBay. They sabotaged a deal between two established and credible ebayer’s, lost revenue, and in the process, lost additional money to partially correct their mistakes. Seems like this authentication concept is a guaranteed losing proposition for eBay among all the external liabilities passed on to the seller as well. I’m sure the jargon in their terms and conditions, cover all bases for them, on purely legal pretext, but the optics and principal value is awful. It makes their terms and conditions some what moot. If it looks and sounds bad, it probably is. 

 

The goal: 

eBay owes me a profound apology. Both the persons who implemented this idea and the "authenticator" who is either wholly under qualified and or wildly overqualified (more on this below). As well as settlement for the loss of sale funds and/or loss of item. 

 

The story:

I am helping my GF sell a few higher end shoes. I have the eBay account and she doesn't have the stomach for stuff like this (she's a doctor ironically). I'm the salesperson in the house and it's worth stating despite my vast experience with sales, this whole charade sent me into a full blown panic attack. Mostly due to the profound lack of reasoning, zero transparency/communication and frankly, enacting a process that moves wildly too fast with zero checks and balances to mitigate liability for “their” clients (that’s us) the “sellers” of eBay. The fact I was sick over this, shows how profoundly this situation with eBay bothered me. We don't need the money, and I regret doing this over $300. How this is constructed will wind up sending someone, at some point, who is a novice or uniformed of what eBay is doing, to the hospital and it’s not worth it for a measly $100, etc. We do this because we think eBay is the place to sell items when we clean out our closets. It's an awful process to sell clothing to be honest. eBay made it that much worse. I did what any A+++ seller would do. I shipped the item first thing this past Tuesday (after a long holiday weekend), upgrading shipping complimentary for the buyer and got these on their way quickly. I’ve regulated all apartment item sales to Offerup, which might single handily be the greatest invention of all digital apps I have on my phone. Period. Unfortunately, it’s not great for clothes sales. It’s a real joy to meet some people in person. I met a guy yesterday buying container store shoe containers and he had his two little twin daughters in the back of his car with their twisted little braids (so sweet) and we chatted for a few minutes. Two people from vastly different backgrounds and races, and that experience was so much more fulfilling than this clown show I am dealing with here on eBay. 

 

The item: 

I posted a “new without box” pair of high end Golden Goose sneakers (women's), out of production model and very desirable. These sell for $400-$700. I posted for $350 new, with make an offer. Already extremely reasonable. I quickly procured a few buyers and consummated a deal with one. A buyer with stellar feedback (more on this point below). I noticed when payment was completed there was a C/O address or rather my item was going to someone/somewhere else? Never had I seen this. And I’ve shipped to some shady places and this ranks among the top. This is how ambiguous this is and I still actually don’t fully understand what transpired, who removed agency from my own sale and frankly, exposing multiple people to potential fraud, damage, product loss (more on this below), etc. These shoes that I sold are in fact brand new, but the style is a “worn” look. I took extremely clear photos of the insoles, outsoles, side, serial numbers, etc. Heck even the stickers were still on the insoles. They were listed correctly, despite any statement from eBay’s authenticator claiming otherwise. Even their comments were conflicting. Wearing these around the house to try on still makes these new. And this is where things get complicated and a really dangerous grey area for eBay. Yes I am using their platform and they make all the final calls, I sign off to that, but this is a gross overreach of authority taken by someone who should not have that position or ability to make such a decision. Out of this whole multiple thousand word rant, the greatest take away is that someone - after shipping my shoes - handled my item that was not authorized to do so and should not have had any role with how this deal was consummated. Period. If this person doesn’t exist. I don’t write this rant. They took overriding action for a party who did not authorize this (I spoke to the buyer - more on that much lower). None-whatsoever. Zero. Objectively 99% of the population would also consider these shoes as brand new. Apparently there is a very small subset of buyers, so called “sneakerheads” so I am told, that this whole ridiculous concept is geared too. Compounded by the fact this third party service employed by eBay is specifically geared to accommodating sneaker heads thus likely holding a different standard/expectation of such items. If you step back and really think about it, it makes your head hurt. The literal stupidity. 

 

Umm, I’m not selling a rare limited edition pair of Air Jordan’s…And frankly, were I selling such an item, I’d have authenticated by my own third party and sell with certificates, etc, etc. Never would I allow or employ eBay to take on that role. That’s financial suicide as far as I’m concerned. I feel like what happened is a microcosm of our overall society - really shocking when you step back and look at it. eBay is tailoring it’s functions to a very small and apparently vocal group of buyers who serves precisely no one. eBay effectively stepped into a deal without permission, or requests from either party, to I guess, monitor listing descriptions. I mean that’s what they’re telling me. They say authenticator. I say hall pass monitor. There are five other ways to address this type of thing - what transpired with me wasn’t one of those methods. They sabotaged a deal with a 100% feedback buyer with over 1000 positive reviews and a 100% feedback seller with almost 200 positive reviews. One has to ask the question; what in the hell was eBay thinking? I’m not selling you know, a stack of “found” Sony tv’s. To me authentication means chain of custody or ahem, authenticity (i.e. they are not a reproduction, serial number look up, etc). Not a proverbial hall pass monitor to dispute if the item I am selling was tried on once or twice, because effectively that’s where we are at. Splitting hairs. My GF has 10 pairs of these shoes - I know with every fiber in my body they're authentic. I have a perfect 100% feedback. Yet, they failed the "authentication" process.  

 

What is authentication really? 

Beats the total heck out of me…

Apparently, some of these items are flagged for the new authentication process. This is apparently a counter measure to buyer abuse. I am not quite sure how this was established or decided, but it makes absolutely zero sense. There is no arbitration, no communication, nothing. I shipped this package to some location in Las Vegas, apparently, and to what I now understand is something called sneakercon. Don’t know, sounds stupid to me. 

 

Additional points: 

1. At no point in my listing contract was I advised my item would be handled by a third party. Any seller has a right to be aware that any item we sell, will be handled by another person prior to the buyer receiving. Seems like they do a good job broadcasting this to buyers. But not sellers. We assume tremendous liability now knowing this. This was very unclear initially. I could care less if the 1,5,10 emails sent about these changes and “authentication” is a new tool, etc. There needs to be information at the point of sale. Period. 

2. I was not notified who this third party is, their qualifications, and contact info. There should absolutely have been a notification (again chain of custody) that another individual was in possession of my item immediately upon receiving this, as I have a right to call back or decline such handling. This is the exact moment when I should  be told who this person is and what their roll is - along with any relevant qualifications. How do I know some overzealous power hungry kid didn’t just do this for kicks (possible reason in my opinion). You know, you give someone overreaching power to control a narrative, trust me, they’ll take it. 

  1. I was not given any opportunity to defend myself, my reputation, and item representation. In this absurd process. I was notified at 7:32PM that the authentication partner declined the…well I still don’t know what they declined, but the sale was reversed. At 7:52PM I received a follow-up email that the buyer was refunded in full, shoes were packaged and in return transit to a very old address that they had taken from eBay. (Another thing I learned last night). So in a matter of 20 minutes, I’m out $328 (refunded to the buyer), out $16.10 for out of pocket shipping and no $500 shoes that are being mailed to an incorrect address. Wonderful and my first thought is I have absolutely no idea who to contact or what to do. That the next step would be a phone call to someone in Indonesia who can’t help me at all. If I were going to have a stroke, it would have been at that moment. You laugh, but we all know I am 1000% correct. It’s frightening in hindsight. It should be stated that the return address I had was not correct in the account. Totally ridiculous since as a private seller who doesn’t accept returns who deals with private buyers “return address” was never relevant. 15 years - never once was relevant. All my other addresses were in fact correct in the eBay system, along with a matching and correct address on the actual parcel. None of this was cross referenced and no attempt was made by eBay to verify such a thing before making a return (gross negligence) and exposed them to serious liability. In the matters of 20 minutes it was judge, jury, verdict..See you later type of thing. 
  2. Third party vendor failed to cross reference buyer and seller info. Whatever algorithm they’re using, it sucks. Straight forward. There was no weight given to either acting party. None. Which is frankly bizarre. This is the part that worries me the most. And why I throw out the whole over zealous kid theory because any functioning algorithm or rational person would see this and be like - all green lights. How anything was flagged needs eBay to ask questions internally. 
  3. Third party vendor failed to cross reference mailing information. Who assumes liability if my shoes are lost or not returned? 
  4. Lacks complete context. Why would eBay ever consider getting involved in a transaction between two eBay people who have perfect history and scores. It evades all logic. 
  5. Why wasn’t the authenticator or eBays immediate next step after giving a failing grade to STILL contact the buyer, report their findings and ask if they would like to proceed. I mean seriously, this is the obvious next step. Had they simply reached out to the buyer saying, our authentication process states that these shoes are in fact “authentic” however we feel there is a little more wear on them. To which the buyer would have responded this is the known style and approved the completion of the deal. 
  6. Why didn’t this authenticator reach out to me the seller to confirm listing details and/or in the event of failure? We believe this error occurred, what next step would you like to take?

 

Conclusion/Current status: 

 

I spoke to the buyer. This person confirmed none of this was requested or authorized by them. Very nice person also. How about that?! Two quality people come together on this platform and we’re the grown ups here. The buyer understands clearly what was being purchased and wishes the deal was completed. So eBay just sabotaged a perfectly solid deal and lost a bunch of money in the process. 

 

I have no idea where my items are. To be fair in the my hour long problem solving last night - I did get someone from fraud department help clean up this monumental mess eBay made and at face value, seems like a knowledgeable and nice guy. He said he will hunt down the package and fix all of this. We’ll see. As of now - no money and no shoes. Wonderful. And who knows if I’ll actually get my shoes back, even if they get the address straight. What if I get a pair of flip flops or socks in return. Wha the heck know’s, but I have reason to be skeptical. 

 

Regards, M

 

Message 1 of 119
latest reply
1 BEST ANSWER

Accepted Solutions

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

Final conclusion for those that care at this point. 

 

Compensation agreed and case now closed. 

 

The cherry on top is that the authenticator (the 3rd party) once again lied and stated the item was returned the way it was sent and that was without the limited edition shoe bags. This is patently false and not only are the sneaker con authenticators unqualified, they are liars too. It's no longer my fight as my case is closed and resolved. eBay did right on this and they took full responsibility. I'll say it again, they are now fully aware of what transpired. 

All the best..

View Best Answer in original post

Message 105 of 119
latest reply
118 REPLIES 118

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

Oone statement stands out:

"Wearing these around the house to try on still makes these new."

Wrong that one statement is.  Item is considered used at that point. 

 

As for the service and authentication:there opinion is going to stand.

Well you can list em as used if you are willing to make and agreement with the buyer they can still purchase them. Such then would agree with the mess if it goes back through authentication.

 

Edited to add in the listing you state:" BRAND NEW" VIOLATING WHAT YOU SAY AS NEW WITH OUT BOX: ITS A FAIL RIGHT THERE FOR AUTHENTICATION.

 

Message 2 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

TEE ELL DEE ARE

Message 3 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

Thanks for the response. But obviously something changed and this is now extremely black and white and lacks any context. Furthermore, once again, removes agency from seller or buyer to make such determination. I'm going to dig my heels on this. Been selling on eBay 15 years. Never once put into question and I do list things honestly and to the highest standards. 

Message 4 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

Whew, couldnt get thru all that, but those shoes are scuffed and shouldnt have been listed as brand new. And I doubt that 'wearing them around the house to try on' did that.This was a not as described case waiting to happen. And since you didnt mention those scuffs in your description, you are at fault. Dont ever depend on a buyer to look at pictures,and they should have been listed as 'used'..



``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

“Never pick a fight with an ugly person. They don’t have anything to lose.” ~Robin Williams
Message 5 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

Kindly don't reply to something you are not familiar with. They are Golden Goose sneakers. That's how they are made. I can't believe I have to defend this too. I am not sure the eBay community is the right place for me any longer. Good grief. 

Message 6 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

I am not sure if you are aware that you can have 5 addresses listed with ebay.

you had the incorrect return address listed and want to blame ebay

 

you were unaware and unprepared and are blaming ebay for something anyone could have taken care of

thats the chance you took when you went thru without having an up to date return

 

the authenticate team shipped them back to an old address that you had listed with ebay as a current one

dont you feel you are to blame for the wayward package?

@fi.ra 


Germantown proud Germantown strong
up the whiskey hickon
moving right along
19144
Message 7 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

Sorry you are offended, but Im sure they werent made with a scuff on each toe, and even the inside soles look a little dirty..should have been listed as used and probably would have passed the authentication process.



``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

“Never pick a fight with an ugly person. They don’t have anything to lose.” ~Robin Williams
Message 8 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.


@fi.ra wrote:

Thanks for the response. But obviously something changed and this is now extremely black and white and lacks any context. Furthermore, once again, removes agency from seller or buyer to make such determination. I'm going to dig my heels on this. Been selling on eBay 15 years. Never once put into question and I do list things honestly and to the highest standards. 


you can dig in: hey you have the right to an arbitration with ebay: Right there in the user agreement:

 

As for eBay and the authentication services: you alos agree to using them by using ebay if you do not realize that:

 

Now I do agree with you such should be a choice at least to the buyer of such items: with loss of return options if they do not use such authentication services..

 

But hat of course would result in a large amount of payment disputes... and such is why eBay does this the way they do.

Message 9 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

Another somewhat icey response. So much missing context. There should more checks and balances regardless to ensure all parties are equally protected including if mistakes were by either party. I admitted to this. Sounds like eBay is now too bad and a complete roll of the die? I mean it sounds like too bad, you're loss. Yuk. 

Message 10 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

Hopefully you will get your shoes back sometime, then list them somewhere else as 'used', you shouldnt have a problem.



``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

“Never pick a fight with an ugly person. They don’t have anything to lose.” ~Robin Williams
Message 11 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

If you sell these collectible sneakers, you are now subject to the authentication process. It is a shame, but now i just avoid selling in those categories for some of the reasons you outlined. 

What do you mean by “dig in your heels”? Are you going to attempt to fight it out with eBay over a $300 sale, when you have already described the personal effect this experience has caused you? You pointed out that eBay will have legally covered all their bases, so your efforts would likely be in vain, sorry to say.

 

Good luck to you and sorry for your trouble.

Message 12 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

Again, please, that's how they are made. Really once again back to splitting hairs. It seems like this is a really good conversation since there appears to be a very wide view of what's being sold, the condition and process. Once again, this is how Golden Goose are made. Please do a Google search. That's their signature, a scuff on each toe, etc. 

 

"should have been listed as used and probably would have passed the authentication process." 

 

Umm am I inline for the guillotine? 😳 

Message 13 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

how dramatic.



``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

“Never pick a fight with an ugly person. They don’t have anything to lose.” ~Robin Williams
Message 14 of 119
latest reply

Serious questions need to be asked about Authentication. Pivotal case. Read.

Thank you for this confirmation. I'm just looking to share a story. No, eBay has shown me what the deal is now. It's just so unsetting that this is the process. There are other ways to go about this mitigating time, labor, etc. I get it, using new without box has been elevated to a very serious level. It's not good in my opinion, but I buy and sell collectible records (on Discogs), I have tens of thousands of dollars of records I've bought and sold over the years (something I would never sell or buy on eBay), and sure there are discrepancies time to time, but 99% of the time we're all gentlemen and a few audiophile gals who make adjustment's if records come damaged, mis pops or crackle, etc. Out of 200+ orders in the last 4-5 years, maybe 5 encountered some loss, usually not more than $20. This thing with eBay is just different. Buyer should have had final call to be honest. 

Message 15 of 119
latest reply