Service Metrics - The Equivalent of Stealing Money Outwardly

[rockbottomauto]

We are one of the larger sellers of OEM auto parts on eBay, and have been for many years.

We offer completely free returns, even for buyers that simply "change their minds", but of course every month we enter the "very high items not as described" threshold.

Every single case that has been opened against us for "items not as described" has been completely proven that the buyer simply ordered the wrong part for their application. The words "items not as described" should equate that we sent the customer the wrong part, or a part that was not in brand new condition etc. Buyers know in all facets of online shopping they just need to lie a little to get what they want.

Furthermore, if we are offering "free returns", why should we be penalized with an extra 5% of fees anyway? It's not like the good folks at eBay are footing the bill for us, we are still out the shipping costs both ways. 

We sell exactly the same amount of parts on Amazon every single month, and guess what? We get about 80% less in returns from the parts sold on Amazon. Why is that you ask? eBay encourages scam behavior.

I know you guys are losing market share and there probably won't be an eBay in 10 years, but you really should strongly consider erasing this policy and I mean quickly. We started last year making plans to leave eBay, and are going to do so sooner rather than later.

Shameless cash grabs are a sign of desperation, and a message to the community that you are scared to death of going under.

[gthmotorcycleparts]

Your 100% correct , eBay is a sorry company 

[fsquaredperformance]

Infuriating. I went through this last month. If we ever hope to see eBay change this clearly profitable scam, we need more affected sellers to go beyond venting on an eBay administered forum. Here are some things you can do:

File a BBB Complaint:

https://www.bbb.org/consumer-complaints/file-a-complaint/get-started

Reach out to Ina Steiner at EcommerceBytes blog with a well-reasoned letter to the editor. She may publish it.

ina@ecommercebytes.com

[cosmeticsdiscounted]

EBay wants all sellers to offer free return shipping. This will keep them from being liable to their customer the sellers. They will no longer have to refund the seller on return labels or merchandise  that is damaged by the customer "over them teaching customers to use the not as described to get their money back". 

 Free shipping has no protection other than getting to keep 50% if it's damaged?  That's not protection after paying for shipping to get it back,the seller is still in the hole. If you dont refund 100% eBay still keeps thier fee,  The only protection is for eBay, they are no longer responsible because you offer the return and you are not being forced to, and of course they still get paid on their fees. Boycott and close the store! If you dont you are supporting them on this issue. You can use another platform until it falls off, just export your inventory. Most buyers are using the web to find the best deal!

[lqdtechoutlet]

Here is the complaint I filed with BBB:  

(I'll post eBays response in the next post) 

Complaint:

 eBay is penalizing sellers for things that are out of their control through their service metrics system. These penalties result in higher fees.
Within the last year, eBay has implemented a system called Service Metrics. When a buyer initiates a return, they are given a series of options. If they choose a specific one such as 'Doesn't work or defective', 'Missing parts or pieces', 'Doesn't match description or photos', etc., eBay adds a mark (or defect) to the sellers account. eBay refers to these as 'SNAD cases'. Too many SNAD cases in one category will result in the seller being moved to the 'Very High' zone on their service metrics. This causes an additional 5% penalty fee for each item sold in that category.

Unfortunately, this 5% can add up to extra hundreds or even thousands of dollars.

The problem with this is that eBay will add the defect regardless if the return case was opened by accident, the wrong selection was made, if the buyer was in the wrong or even if there was clear cut evidence of a scam. Scammers sometimes open up SNAD cases and claim that the item was not as received, demanding that the seller issue a partial refund. Hypothetically, if a buyer used eBay's message to admit to the seller that they opened up the return case and chose 'Defective' as the option only because they were attempting to scam, eBay would still refuse to remove the defect from the seller's seller metrics page. Similarly, if a buyer admitted that he/she chose the wrong option and apologized, eBay would still have the same response.

This is despite the fact that eBay representatives have full access to all communication between the buyer and seller.

Along with this, a seller's SNAD cases is determined to be 'Very High' by comparing the percentage to that of their peers percentage. eBay has subcategories which are weighed against all the other subcategories within the main category. For example, the main category of Cellphones and Smartphones has subcategories of Cellphone Accessories, Cellphone Parts, etc.

A seller who sells actual smartphones is being weighed against those who sell cellphone accessories. Unfortunately, one subcategory naturally has a higher rate of returns than the other so it is unreasonable to compare them.

eBay allows sellers to choose if they want to accept returns or not. However, if a buyer is feeling buyer's remorse and wants to return the item anyway, they are given a list of options as to why they are returning it. If they choose something such as 'Changed my mind', the return will be rejected. However, if they choose something such as 'Damaged or defective', the return will be forced through even though the seller did not accept returns.

Many, many buyers are aware of this and take advantage of it, doing nothing more than resulting in more defects for sellers. eBay is also aware of this problem and refuses to fix it.

On September 5, 2020, a buyer by the username of [redacted] opened up a SNAD case for a Blackberry Z10 phone I sold. Her reasoning was that it would not work with her service provider and the option she chose was 'Not working or defective'.

This was all before I had even shipped her the item. This item was never in her possession and yet she was still able to open this SNAD case which eBay still refuses to remove to date.

The transaction ID for this is [redacted] .

In this SNAD cases, like many others, I do not believe there is anything on my end that I could have done to prevent the buyer from opening it. Yet, I am penalized for it. I've contacted eBay about this many times and none of my defects have been removed. This is despite the fact that a good portion of them were opened up in error.

[lqdtechoutlet]

eBays BBB response:

"

---

Hello [redacted] ,

Thank you for the opportunity to address your BBB complaint. We wanted to begin by reassuring you that the peer group you are compared to for your service metrics is determined by more than just the category; we also will look at the listing site, transaction volume, item condition, return policy, shipping time frames and, most importantly for the concerns you raised, the average selling price. This means that sellers who sell actual smartphones won't be weighed against those who sell cellphone accessories.

We know that you have some concerns that if a return was opened by mistake or for the wrong reason, this may result in a significant negative impact to your account and we want to clarify that part of the reason we compare you to your peer group is to account for situations like this. All businesses, both on and off of eBay, will experience returns that are ultimately unfounded or due to a mistake on the customers part and this is to be expected - since your peers will be having the same rate of these kinds of experiences, we account for this when we determine your return rate by comparing you to your peers.

For this specific return, we know that you disagree with the buyer's return reason because they had not yet received the order, but there are some situations where the buyer would be able to accurately report an item was not described accurately before the order was received. In your listing you stated this phone was compatible with Verizon phone service, and the buyer learned after purchase that this is not true and requested a return due to the incorrect information in the description. We would not consider this to be a form of abuse or an invalid return request and would have expected that you issue a refund through the case since you were still in possession of the phone. Since we had to be asked to step in and make a decision, a case closed without seller resolution strike was recorded and you would no longer qualify for the enhanced protections that you receive as a Top Rated Seller who offers 30-day returns.

We wanted to make sure you were aware of these enhanced protections so you can take steps to qualify in the future; when you achieve Top Rated Seller status, offer 30-day returns on eligible listings, refund your buyer directly through the return request, and report to us that you feel the buyer's return reason was incorrect, you would automatically receive protection against negative or neutral feedback, would be protected from any defects related to the case, and it would not be counted towards your service metrics. You would report these kinds of concerns through the return itself or through the Seller Help section of your account (https://www.ebay.com/sellerhelp), and you can read more about these enhanced protections here:
https://www.ebay.com/help/policies/selling-policies/seller-protections?id=4345

Even though we do not consider the example you've provided to be a clear sign of abuse or fraudulent behavior on the part of your buyer, because you are a Top Rated Seller who offers 30-day returns, we would put our trust in you judgement and provide the protections described above when you report these kinds of concerns through the site and have taken steps to resolve your customers concerns. At this time we aren't able to review the transaction for protections as it has been more than 90 days since the transaction date, but we trust that this added information serves to help guide you in the future if you run into similar situations.

Regards,
eBay"

[rockmafia5]

The BBB is a joke.  It is well known that a business with a less than stellar reputation can buy a AAA rating with them regardless of the number of complaints.  Many shady businesses are quick to tout their great "rating".  The BBB also has no power to do anything to ebay.

[marie185antiques]

Thank you for your well written post on Seller Metrics = Cash Grab Scam.  Hopefully, more sellers will be made aware of what has been going on for much too long.  The only way to put an end to this criminal action is by exposing them on national TV i.e. '60 Minutes' or a Class Action Suit.  E-bay will only take action when it effects their bottom line and then it will be too late.

[rockbottomauto]

We have offered free return shipping for over 3 years now, we are already using two other platforms.

[rockbottomauto]

We appreciate everyone who has taken the time to comment, this scam is still in full effect.

[fsquaredperformance]

I received no resolution from eBay through BBB either. BBB is a joke, essentially a protection racket. But, at least if enough people opened complaints, they may hit eBay for higher fees to maintain their bogus "AAA" rating.

Here is the complete communication from our BBB complaint: 

TLDR: eBay violates their own stated "Seller Protections" policies by not removing falsely opened SNAD cases from service metrics for Top Rated Sellers. They're brazen as hell because they know we're all bound by a user agreement with an "agreement to arbitrate" clause that prevents us from bringing a class action lawsuit, which they slipped in under our noses, requiring us to "opt out" by mail within 30 days of their fine print "announcement". I'm sure less than 1% of all sellers on the platform took advantage of the opt out.

Consumer's Original Complaint :

eBay is charging us a >60% penalty on our eBay fees despite our reporting of buyers who falsely claimed an item was not as described.

eBay's Service Metrics policy is unfairly charging sellers exorbitant penalties for "Item Not As Described" claims by buyers. When opening a return request, buyers frequently select a "seller fault" reason for return, often by mistake and sometimes knowingly. They may assume they will not have to pay for a return label or risk having their return denied if they claim a reason that puts the seller at fault. eBay allows sellers to report these buyers, but will only remove the case from the seller's account if they identify a pattern of behavior or choose to "take action" on the buyer's account. However, according to their "Seller Protections" page (found under "Help and Contact"), eBay Top Rated sellers are afforded some protections when "A buyers falsely claims an item is not as described". A Top Rated seller must report the buyer, and if eBay "determines the buyer made a false claim", eBay will "automatically remove negative and neutral feedback, defects, and open cases in service metrics"

In the past few weeks, we have reported 4 buyer returns for "a buyer falsely claims an item is not as described". Return ID's: 5156867900 and 5159370537 (reported 9/25/20), 5160996549 (reported 10/5/20), 5163108929 (reported 10/13/20). Despite multiple calls to eBay customer support, we have received no update on the status of these appeals. Because they have not been removed, beginning October 20th, our account is now in the "Very High" category for "Item Not as Described" claims, resulting in an additional 5% penalty on our eBay final value fees. We were previously paying approximately 8% on final value fees, so the additional 5% represents a 60% increase in our fees overall. If this penalty isn't removed, we will pay approximately $3,000 per month in penalty fees. [redacted]

I've had many calls with eBay agents, and have been told multiple conflicting things regarding this policy. I've been told the cases are not appealable under any circumstances. When I directed the agent to the "Seller Protections" page that says otherwise, I was told that was an error and they would report it. I've been told that Top Rated sellers (like us) are able to have these removed if eBay finds the buyer opened the return for the wrong reason (as stated on the Seller Protections page). And most recently, I've been told by an agent that these are not appealable on an individual basis, but that the entire metric for a given month can be appealed. That agent apparently opened that appeal on 10/21, but I have not been able to get an update on it either.

There are other return requests that we suspect were opened for the wrong reason, but we don't have enough evidence in eBay messages to be confident that eBay would side with us on appeal. As usual on eBay, sellers are presumed guilty until proven innocent.

Finally, I take objection to this metric in its' entirety. It compares us to a "peer group", which eBay defines with a total lack of transparency, and standards fluctuate monthly. Furthermore, I've learned from eBay reps we are not being compared to sellers in the specific subcategories we sell in, but eBay Motors in general. Several of our most popular selling items are high-dollar, electronic, and they fit hundreds of different vehicles. By their nature, they have a higher return rate than other items on eBay Motors. Despite being a Top Rated seller for over two years (until our most recent evaluation), and having 100% positive feedback, this arbitrary metric fluctuates wildly month-to-month. I see no avenue to improve it except to delist some of our most popular and profitable items. This imprecise, unappealable, and non-transparent metric does not appear to be a good faith effort by eBay to improve buyer experiences on the platform, but instead, a heavy-handed attempt to extract more revenue for eBay out of good and bad sellers alike.

Account ID: fsquaredperformance

Consumer's Desired Resolution:

eBay should immediately remove the 4 cases from our Service Metrics that we reported over the past month, according to their published "Seller Protections" policies. eBay should stop charging us the additional 5% penalty immediately, and issue credit for any penalty fees charged before this is resolved. eBay should explain in detail who our "peer group" is, and how it is defined. eBay should provide the return rates for the various subcategories within eBay Motors, and explain how they justify measuring us against, and penalizing us for not meeting the same standards as sellers who are selling in different subcategories, with different inherent return rates.

BBB Processing

10/26/2020                web       BBB        Case Received by BBB

10/29/2020                RN         BBB        Case Reviewed by BBB - Big 5

10/29/2020                Otto      EMAIL     Send Acknowledgement to Consumer

10/29/2020                Otto      EMAIL     Notify Business of Dispute - Big 5

11/28/2020                WEB      BBB        RECEIVE BUSINESS RESPONSE : Hello {redacted},

                                Thank you for the opportunity to address your BBB complaint. We understand you have concerns regarding your seller performance metrics the fees being charged as a result of them. We have reviewed your request and would like to provide clarification.

                                We firstly want to thank you for your feedback regarding our Seller Performance evaluation process. Realizing that this process is a significant part of eBay which can affect your way of doing business (and subsequently, the fees you are charged), we appreciate your position on this policy.

                                Because we do not have a physical relationship with any item sold on the site, we must remain unbiased when a buyer files a return request. To ensure this, we rely on objective information presented, including the reasoning provided when the buyer requests to return the item. If the reasoning indicates that the item is not as described, we consider this a negative experience for the buyer. To prevent this as much as possible, we hold sellers accountable for having a high amount of returns and returns requested due to the item not matching the description. Recognizing the vast number of categories on our site, we use peers who sell in the same category as a basis for these metrics. We acknowledge your sentiment about this peer review system and want to assure you that this process is consistently updated and improved. As new sellers join and as market trends change, we refine this metric and what determines a high amount of returns.

                                If you feel that a return reason has been misused or that a buyer is abusing any of our policies, we encourage you to report the buyer through the return claim. While this does not impact the return reasoning provided, these reports are handled by our Trust and Safety team who will act on any account deemed risky to the eBay community. We do not disclose the outcomes of these reviews to respect the privacy of our members but can assure you that the appropriate action will be taken in accordance with our User Agreement.

                                We understand you have concerns with specific return claims and are requesting that we appeal the provided reasoning. As you did have Top Rated status when these returns were handled, you had the ability to issue partial refunds and were covered from transaction defects. Please know that these Top-Rated benefits do not include the ability to appeal return reasons or amounts of return. We consider these metrics separate because they indicate problems with the item specifically as opposed to the seller's return policy. Based on the amount of returns and the reasonings provided, your return rate metric was above 5.00%. As such, the additional fees were charged appropriately.

                                Thank you again for the opportunity to address your BBB complaint. We appreciate your time and understanding.

                                Regards,

                                eBay

12/01/2020                OttO     EMAIL     Forward Business response to Consumer

12/01/2020                WEB      BBB        BBB REVIEWS CONSUMER REBUTTAL TO BUSINESS RESPONSE : (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)

                                "To ensure this, we rely on objective information presented, including the reasoning provided when the buyer requests to return the item."

                                The "reasoning provided when the buyer requests to return the item" is clearly subjective, not objective. As stated in my complaint, buyers frequently choose a "seller fault" reason for return incorrectly, whether intentionally or not, because they perceive their return request is more likely to be approved, they are more likely to get a pre-paid return shipping label, or in some cases they simply misread the item description.

                                "Recognizing the vast number of categories on our site, we use peers who sell in the same category as a basis for these metrics."

                                The problem is you are comparing us against peers who sell items in the same "category" as us (eBay Motors), but not necessarily the same "subcategory". Different subcategories within eBay Motors have inherently different return rates, and they vary widely. A seller like us, who lists items in many different subcategories on eBay Motors, but makes a high percentage of our sales on expensive electronic items that fit hundreds of different vehicles, and some users may find complicated to use, will naturally have a higher return rate than a seller who lists in many different subcategories on eBay Motors, but makes many of their sales in something simple, like brake pads. This explains why a seller like us, with a long history of Top Rated performance and 100% positive feedback, can find themselves routinely on the edge of your "Very High Item Not as Described Return" penalties in Service Metrics. If the goal is to improve buyer experiences on the platform by penalizing sellers who don't provide good buyer experiences, this metric is failing miserably. If the goal is to raise more revenue for eBay per dollar of sales on the platform, and to justify your share price to stockholders despite the rate at which you're losing market share to competitors like Amazon, then this metric makes perfect since. It's clear what your motives are.

                                "If you feel that a return reason has been misused or that a buyer is abusing any of our policies, we encourage you to report the buyer through the return claim. While this does not impact the return reasoning provided, these reports are handled by our Trust and Safety team who will act on any account deemed risky to the eBay community."..."Please know that these Top-Rated benefits do not include the ability to appeal return reasons or amounts of return."

                                This is where your response blatantly departs from your own published policies. We have reported several of these buyers, using the process outlined in your "Seller Protections" page. Where your policy CLEARLY states: "Top Rated Sellers (TRS) who reside in the US or Canada and offer 30 day or longer returns are protected on items listed on eBay.com when: A buyer falsely claims an item was not as described." "If the report qualifies:" "For transactions to be eligible you must report the buyer" "We will also automatically remove negative and neutral feedback, defects, and OPEN CASES IN SERVICE METRICS." I reviewed all the conditions of a "qualifying" report, and we met all of them at the time of submitting our reports.

                                The link to your Seller Protections Policies is here: https://www.ebay.com/help/policies/selling-policies/seller-protections?id=4345&st=3&pos=1&query=Sell...

                                I'm also happy to provide screenshots of this policy if BBB gives me the opportunity to do so.

                                "Based on the amount of returns and the reasonings provided, your return rate metric was above 5.00%. As such, the additional fees were charged appropriately."

                                Our total return rate may have been 5%, but as I recall our "Item not as described" return rate was around 1.45% at the time of the evaluation in question, compared to our peers of roughly 0.7%. Had the 4 reports we submitted been handled according to YOUR OWN published Seller Protection policies, we would have easily avoided the "Very High" rating, and the penalty fees that cost us over $2k in November. Current projections look like they will impact us again in January.

                                How many thousands of sellers are being impacted by this blatant disregard for your own stated policies? How many tens of millions of revenue have you raised from sellers who have had their reports wrongly disregarded? I sincerely hope we get a resolution to this through BBB. If not, I'll pursue other avenues.

12/01/2020                              BBB        MORE INFO RECEIVED FROM THE CONSUMER : ***Document Attached***

                                Screenshots of eBay's published "Seller Protections" policy attached.

12/03/2020                OttO     EMAIL     Forward Consumer Rebuttal to Business

12/05/2020                WEB      BBB        RECEIVED BUSINESS' REBUTTAL RESPONSE : Hello {redacted},

                                Thank you for providing additional context.

                                We appreciate your candor regarding our metrics. Please know that our peer review system is not based on the category exclusively. Other determining factors, such as the item type and price are factored into what constitutes a peer for this metric. This comparison does not impact your seller performance rating. We monitor this metric because it is a negative experience for buyers when they need to return an item due to undisclosed defects.

                                If we find that a buyer has misused our Money Back Guarantee, we do offer additional protections for Top-Rated sellers. We recognize you may disagree with the buyers reasonings for returning orders and will act if we find the reasoning has been used inappropriately. There are many protections that are guaranteed for Top-Rated sellers, such as the ability to issue a partial refund, and feedback protection if the return is completed. That being said, filing a report on a buyer does not guarantee the removal of the return from your Service Metric Dashboard. Based on the amount of "Not as described" returns at the time of your evaluation, the additional fees were charged in accordance with our User Agreement.

                                We appreciate your understanding and hope we have provided clarity regarding our decision in this matter.

                                Regards,

                                eBay

12/08/2020                RN         EMAIL     Send Business' Rebuttal Response to Consumer

12/09/2020                WEB      BBB        CONSUMER REJECTS BUSINESS' FINAL OFFER : (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)

                                "Other determining factors, such as the item type and price are factored into what constitutes a peer for this metric."

                                "Item type"? What does that mean? Will you go on record saying that our "peer group" is limited to the specific "subcategories" that we sell items in? No, because it is not. Again, the lack of transparency into how you define this "peer group" is concerning, as eBay generates so much revenue from these penalty fees. A clear conflict of interest.

                                "We monitor this metric because it is a negative experience for buyers when they need to return an item due to undisclosed defects."

                                Wrong, buyers select a "seller fault" return for many reasons. In fact, your return system incentivizes this behavior from buyers. When they choose a "seller fault" return reason, buyers are more likely to have their request approved and receive a pre-paid return shipping label, regardless of the condition they return the item in, and regardless of the accuracy of their claims.

                                "We recognize you may disagree with the buyers reasonings for returning orders and will act if we find the reasoning has been used inappropriately."

                                We've reported several of these, as noted earlier in this complaint. We only reported the ones we could PROVE from communication with the buyer on the eBay platform had been wrongly opened as a "seller fault" return reason. What action did you take?

                                "filing a report on a buyer does not guarantee the removal of the return from your Service Metric Dashboard"

                                Of course it doesn't. However, according to your stated "Seller Protection" policies that I provided as evidence earlier in this complaint, they SHOULD GUARANTEE that the reports we submit are evaluated objectively by eBay, and in cases where there is objective evidence that the buyer opened a return request falsely claiming the seller was at fault, those open cases should be REMOVED from our Service Metrics. By not doing so, YOU have violated the user agreement.

                                eBay has created a system that incentives buyers to select a "seller fault" reason when returning an item. eBay gives sellers no recourse in appealing these "Item not as described returns" counted against us in "Service Metrics", even in the face of objective proof that the buyer selected the wrong return reason, and in direct contradiction to eBay's own stated "Seller Protection" policies. eBay then penalizes sellers with 60% higher eBay final value fees for landing in a "very high" category compared to a "peer group" that they refuse to define with any transparency. This is OUTRAGEOUS.

                                Would you be so brazen without the "Agreement to Arbitrate" clause in your user agreement, preventing sellers from bringing a class action?

                                Ten years, $9 million in sales, and over $700k paid in eBay fees over the life of my business. Tell me, why would I invest more time and resources into growing my business on a platform that demonstrates such bad faith?

12/14/2020                RN         BBB        Bureau Judged Case AJR

12/14/2020                Otto      EMAIL     Inform Consumer Case Closed Answered

12/14/2020                Otto      EMAIL     Inform Business - Case ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED

12/14/2020                Otto      BBB        Case ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED

[rockbottomauto]

Buyers have always returned us their used, original parts from their vehicles and kept our new ones, it's even more sad now that when we open up cases to fight these injustices, eBay has decided to count those against our metrics as well. 

You should not be able to openly steal from your customers.

[flyingmvp]

The Metrics thievery scam has been going on for quite sometimes, it's in the open and well known,

How can someone  "incentivize" the venue to stop this kind of swindle behavior?

[rockbottomauto]

To add insult to injury, we actually got the metrics down this month and are still being charged. eBay states they have no idea how to turn it off, nor how to credit our money back to us. Why does everything have to be so shady?

[valueaddedresource]

---

@rockbottomauto wrote:

To add insult to injury, we actually got the metrics down this month and are still being charged. eBay states they have no idea how to turn it off, nor how to credit our money back to us. Why does everything have to be so shady?

---

@rockbottomauto  are you looking at "current" or "projected" rates? 

eBay does the calculation for the metrics on the 20th of the month.  For me as of today, the "current rate" metrics show as Oct 2020-Dec 2020, "projected rate" metrics show Nov 2020 - January 2021.

So if what you mean is you got the metrics down for January - I suspect that won't stop the extra fees for you until after the calculation on February 20th. 😞 If by "this month" you mean just so far in February, that probably won't be reflected until March 20th.

[rockbottomauto]

No one understands the rating system like we do.

Again, current rates are not being followed and we are being charged. eBay has admitted the mistake and is still not fixing it, nor have they refunded us for the days we should not have been charged.