Service Metrics system clearly needs review to fix a major flaw

[lasantino]

trinton@ebay .. do you have any word on when and if ebay plans to correct this??

@Anonymous 

I'm reposting this , because It is a major problem and I think more sellers will see it here.!  Has anyone talked to customer service lately about this? has there been any hint that they realize it's screwed up??please post if you have been assessed the additional 4% final value fees recently?.. 

the new service metrics system is majorly flawed.  the system penalizes sellers even when the situation is clear that the seller had no way to do anything differently.. sellers have complied with everything ebay has instructed us to do(with the promise of never being penalized, if we handled the returns) and now we are being penalized.

The penalty for going above the return threshold is a 4% additional final value fee (around a 40% fee increase in many categories). Therefore, allowing accidentally inaccurate or even intentionally false reasons for return by buyers looking to recoup a few shipping dollars to count against the service metric could be quite costly to sellers who provide a top rated experience.

Example 1: A buyer recently opened a return for a pair of eyeglasses frames, as “item doesn’t work/defective”. In her return notes, she stated that the “Frames were darling, but were too small to fit my prescription.” The return was automatically accepted and the buyer received a full refund, even though the original shipping technically should not be refunded.

Example 2: A buyer opened a return for a high end business suit, as “Wrong Item Sent”. In the return notes, the buyer stated “You sent 58 not a 54, please refund my money and shipping”. The listing photo and descriptions clearly showed that the suit was size 58. The return was automatically accepted and the buyer will receive a full refund once the item arrives, even though the original shipping technically should not be refunded.

In both instances eBay anchor support was contacted to inquire about the affect of the questionable returns on the new service metric. In both cases the customer service representatives informed me that while they agreed that the returns were both opened incorrectly and should have been ‘buyer remorse' returns, the incorrect defect on the service metrics could not be reversed.

If this is allowed to continue, it is quite possible that these false returns could cause a significant increase in final value fees for sellers who provide a top rated experience, and by no fault of the seller. It would be grossly unethical for eBay to make a profit off honest sellers due to buyer dishonesty, negligence or ignorance.

It is quite obvious that a defect appeal system needs to work hand in hand with the new service metrics system, in order to assure that quality sellers are not needlessly penalized.

[ill-cmmunication]

There is ZERO chance to get any SNAD removed. Once it's there, it's there. Even if a buyer opens a case and closes it immediately. It set in stone. Just let's ALL open cases on every item we buy. See what happens. How far will they take it?

[mam98031]

---

@ill-cmmunication wrote:
There is ZERO chance to get any SNAD removed. Once it's there, it's there. Even if a buyer opens a case and closes it immediately. It set in stone. Just let's ALL open cases on every item we buy. See what happens. How far will they take it?

---

If you were TRS the answer would be yes.  But you aren't so no you can't.

I don' t know what you mean by the balance of your post.  What Ebay will do is stated in the Service Metrics policy.  Looking at your FB, it is highly likely you are currently in the penalty phase of the Service metrics.  That's expensive.  

I would advise you to take a serious look at your business plan and make some adjustments so you can do better.  Your FB shows you clearly have some issues to overcome.  If you continue doing as you are currently doing you are likely to start getting other selling sanctions from Ebay.

@ill-cmmunication 

[jasoheat_0]

agreed , the best part of this , is there are no bench marks ............. which leaves us sellers at ebays mercy ... i mean really , are you green yellow orange or red( what is this kindergarten what ) , no numbers ( bench marks percentages ) and when i asked ( an ebay rep ) for clarification all they could say are the numbers are never the same and for ever changing . i state , so this means very high could be 12% one day and 2.25% another day , thats ridiculous there has to bench marks other wise its a system set up to fail ( at the expense of sellers ) by the end of the call the rep stated they are working on getting numbers , and i said so they are fining us when they haven't worked the bugs out ( not sure she was being honest about that ) ... and a system that calculates fraud abuse against us as they know it happens ... otherwise its just a money grab . thats my opinion

[dgeltd]

I am business seller too selling laptops mainly expensive items low margins turnover 1.5 million, in one month because of this ebay scam i lost £10k

have a nice day everyone

[dgeltd]

Advice to someone may help, i have been selling screen protectors for £1-2 with limits to 1 piece per buyer to increase transaction number and reduce INAD rate, make sure item category is in the same benchmark

[mam98031]

---

@dgeltd wrote:

I am business seller too selling laptops mainly expensive items low margins turnover 1.5 million, in one month because of this ebay scam i lost £10k

have a nice day everyone

---

What do you mean you had a "turnover 1.5 million"?  Does that mean you had 1.5 million $$s in sales in one month??  Only in my dreams could I imagine that.

That is a trademark Logo you are using as your avatar.  Aren't you putting yourself at risk by doing that?  Or maybe you have permission to use it, IDK.  Just asking.

[dgeltd]

That months turnover was 120 so £10k ish lost incl 4% + 1% vat, i am top rated seller but at this case 10% discount fees does not apply. No one can stop me selling those protectors i am not breaching anything here;)

[dgeltd]

In regards to logo it’s just logo i don’t see a problem to be it, otherwise i would be told already

[mam98031]

---

@dgeltd wrote:

In regards to logo it’s just logo i don’t see a problem to be it, otherwise i would be told already

---

Interesting.  It is Apple Computer's Logo.  I would have thought it was trademarked.  

[dgeltd]

Well i am not familiar with this so i removed it for peace of mind, thank you.

[mam98031]

---

@dgeltd wrote:

Well i am not familiar with this so i removed it for peace of mind, thank you.

---

Probably a wise move.

https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+computer+logo&oq=apple+&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0l6.1758j0j1&...

[af.tech.deals]

There is no flaw mate. Its deliberately designed in such a way to maximise their profits at sellers costs. Even ebays own reps confirmed this clearly stating that you are not the only person who's unhappy. The case can be taken off the performance are for without resolution but stays in the metrics costing more money to the sellers. I am looking if a legal case can be started against this robbery. 

[kh-vince]

Hello Everyone,

Due to the age of the thread, it has been closed to further replies.  Please feel free to start a new thread HERE if you wish to continue to discuss this topic.

Thanks for understanding!