So now we are responsible if the package is

[mg152]

Stolen from the buyers porch, mailbox, car trunk etc.....

I will certainly be leaving as a seller as soon as I sell all my junk and get my money 

[mg152]

The regulars probably know I haven’t been around here as much this year. It’s because I’ve moved on as far as selling/buying. I came back to list a few things I thought would sell here and I need some cash right now. We have money tied up in investments and I need liquid cash.

[hillbillymedia]

---

@castlemagicmemories wrote:

Nothing has really changed other than the scam some sellers were using to circumvent an INR claim will no longer work.

************************************************************************************************************

And that was my other thought.  To put an end to those who send something somewhere in the buyer's zip code, but buyer does not receive.

---

I guess I am dumb. Please explain to me how (if nothing has really changed) that ebay is going to prevent sellers from doing this supposed scam. The dates on the tracking prove when the item was initally scanned and when the item was delivered. Also, ebay can see when the label is printed.

[rixstuff]

I will certainly be leaving as a seller as soon as I sell all my junk and get my money 

First, dont sell "junk" - sell good stuff that you might buy yourself or at least sell it in a way that would make people want to buy it.  Second, compare your prices of some of your "junk" - it is pretty high compared to other competing items listed.  An unsold item is worth NOTHING - do some homework and move stuff out the door with better prices.

[mg152]

I’m sorry but you’re incorrect. We’ve already been told the truth by eBay for business on FB. Even amazon only replaces or refunds stolen packages once or twice in the lifetime of an account.

You don’t have to believe me & you should know by now I don’t freak out or exaggerate and I was a cheerleader defending Ebay for years. The blues do not tell the whole truth on here

[missjen831]

---

@couldabeenworse wrote:

Some here are not grasping the problem. 

There is a blue on one thread stating that the tracking has to show the address. 

On another thread, a different blue is saying it’s a miscommunication.

who is right and who is wrong? 

They're both right; "address" has NEVER had to be complete address, and the first blue didn't state it needed to be now.

NO CARRIER publicly displays the full address of the recipient.   Are we seriously discussing whether eBay has secretly voided ALL Seller Protection for INR????

---

They both aren’t right. One specifically said that the address has to be visible on the tracking. That has never been policy and another blue is saying the zip code will suffice. The seller has had to ship the address on the buyers payment and have proof of delivery to the buyers zip code (city/state). One of the blues came out and said the tracking has to show the address. Not the city and zip but the address. So one is wrong and one is right. 

We aren’t discussing whether seller protection for all INRs has been void. We are discussing the implications to the seller if the address must be shown on the tracking & the seller doesn’t have that when the buyer files an INR. 

[missjen831]

---

@fern*wood wrote:

---

@missjen831 wrote:

---

@hillbillymedia wrote:

---

@everything-from-trinkets-to-treasures wrote:

---

@mg152 wrote:

Stolen from the buyers porch, mailbox, car trunk etc.....

I will certainly be leaving as a seller as soon as I sell all my junk and get my money 

---

You will only be repsonible if the tracking has not been uploaded on time, and tracking shows it was not shipped/delivered to the correct address.
If an item was lost int he mail you will still need to have insurance to cover yourself for that
Nothing has really changed other than the scam some sellers were using to circumvent an INR claim will no longer work.
And this has already been clarified by an ebay blue in another thread too.

---

I wish I had a dollar for everytime a blue or customer service rep has clarified wrong information.

---

Right. 

Some here are not grasping the problem. 

There is a blue on one thread stating that the tracking has to show the address. 

On another thread, a different blue is saying it’s a miscommunication.

who is right and who is wrong? 

---

It would be helpful if a blue would merely clarify what "address" refers to.  Frankly, their responses to this have not been satisfactory to me.  I know other posters keep saying that hasn't changed, and I hope they are correct, but I like to be sure.

It shouldn't be this difficult to write rules that are clear.  If a rule has changed, clearly state how it has changed, and don't do it under darkness for us to find later on.

---

I agree. And I am leaning towards  miscommunication here. If a zip code will suffice, the blue should have said so instead of saying it needs to show the address. Reading their responses, I kept wondering if it was a overseas call center rep behind the keyboard. 

[threshold.sales.group]

---

---

 it's the seller's responsibility to ensure their orders make it into their buyer's hands, and it's important they plan for the occasional lost or stolen item.

Has the seller's need to "plan for an occasional lost or stolen item" ever previously been part of the INR policy discussion? That reads very similar to the statements regarding return fraud (and the lack of any real seller protection for the victim).   

[missjen831]

---

@hillbillymedia wrote:

---

@castlemagicmemories wrote:

Nothing has really changed other than the scam some sellers were using to circumvent an INR claim will no longer work.

************************************************************************************************************

And that was my other thought.  To put an end to those who send something somewhere in the buyer's zip code, but buyer does not receive.

---

I guess I am dumb. Please explain to me how (if nothing has really changed) that ebay is going to prevent sellers from doing this supposed scam. The dates on the tracking prove when the item was initally scanned and when the item was delivered. Also, ebay can see when the label is printed.

---

I got the impression that if this change is really correct, it is to crack down on the same zip code scam. I think that’s why they will allegedly look at the sellers history when there is an INR with proof of delivery to the buyers zip code. There’s really no way for eBay to prevent this scam. They could make it mandatory for eBay labels to be used but those are easily photoshopped. I think time will tell here. We just have to wait and see how all this plays out and what the outcome for the seller is. 

[hillbillymedia]

---

@fern*wood wrote:

---

@missjen831 wrote:

---

@hillbillymedia wrote:

---

@everything-from-trinkets-to-treasures wrote:

---

@mg152 wrote:

Stolen from the buyers porch, mailbox, car trunk etc.....

I will certainly be leaving as a seller as soon as I sell all my junk and get my money 

---

You will only be repsonible if the tracking has not been uploaded on time, and tracking shows it was not shipped/delivered to the correct address.
If an item was lost int he mail you will still need to have insurance to cover yourself for that
Nothing has really changed other than the scam some sellers were using to circumvent an INR claim will no longer work.
And this has already been clarified by an ebay blue in another thread too.

---

I wish I had a dollar for everytime a blue or customer service rep has clarified wrong information.

---

Right. 

Some here are not grasping the problem. 

There is a blue on one thread stating that the tracking has to show the address. 

On another thread, a different blue is saying it’s a miscommunication.

who is right and who is wrong? 

---

It would be helpful if a blue would merely clarify what "address" refers to.  Frankly, their responses to this have not been satisfactory to me.  I know other posters keep saying that hasn't changed, and I hope they are correct, but I like to be sure.

It shouldn't be this difficult to write rules that are clear.  If a rule has changed, clearly state how it has changed, and don't do it under darkness for us to find later on.

---

Exactly Fern. The rules and language were quite clear until ebay changed the language in this update. There is a reason for the language change or they wouldn`t have changed it. It looks to me like this will be a wait and see situation. I hope I`m wrong about it but the proof is in the pudding.

[couldabeenworse]

One specifically said that the address has to be visible on the tracking

"address" does not equal "street address".  This was discussed endlessly on the old boards, until finally the wording was changed to include the "ZIP is good enough" phrase.

We aren’t discussing whether seller protection for all INRs has been void.

If eBay requires something that can't be obtained, there is no seller protection for INR.

[couldabeenworse]

The rules and language were quite clear until ebay changed the language in this update.

This "how much of an address do we need" stuff was not mentioned at all in the Fall Update.  It was brought up in passing when a blue [helpfully?] quoted part of the newly updated Help page that no longer contains the "all we need is ZIP" phrase.

There is a reason for the language change or they wouldn`t have changed it.

Almost all the language has been changed in the Help pages.  Most of the wording changes have been improvements; some still need work.

[southern*sweet*tea]

---

@hillbillymedia wrote:

---

@castlemagicmemories wrote:

Nothing has really changed other than the scam some sellers were using to circumvent an INR claim will no longer work.

************************************************************************************************************

And that was my other thought.  To put an end to those who send something somewhere in the buyer's zip code, but buyer does not receive.

---

I guess I am dumb. Please explain to me how (if nothing has really changed) that ebay is going to prevent sellers from doing this supposed scam. The dates on the tracking prove when the item was initally scanned and when the item was delivered. Also, ebay can see when the label is printed. Not all sellers use Ebay labels. I don't, so there's no way for Ebay to see when I print my labels.

---

Buyer buys an item.  No tracking number is uploaded. Estimated delivery date passes. Buyers contacts seller, asking if item has shipped. Seller uploads a tracking number after the buyer asks. It will either show delivery, or show some movement toward the buyer. Problem is, it's the "same zip" scam.  Sellers do this as an outright scam, or to avoid OOS defects, since it's not fatal to have an INR.  Sellers avoiding OOS will just refund the buyer, since an INR carries much less weight than an OOS strike will.  Scam sellers are just scamming.  I see this popping up more and more on the buyer board.

As long as the tracking number is entered right away when you ship, things should be as normal.  If a seller uses tracking, I really don't see a reason to withold it, and I don't see anything changing for those that do upload their tracking in a timely manner.

JMHO FWIW

This is my take on the whole matter.

[southern*sweet*tea]

Here we go, tracking uploaded after the buyer asks, package being sent to someone else/current resident.

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Bidding-Buying/It-s-not-always-the-mailman-scam/m-p/28833229

This buyer just happens to work for the Post Office.

[myboardid]

I hope those of you who feel this is not really change in policy are correct, because  this has the potential to destroy 90% of the sellers here no matter if they are big or small.  Fraudulent INR claims for which eBay forces a seller to refund could (and maybe would) happen to every single sale on ebay.  The temptation might be too high for even the most honest buyers. 

In all the changes eBay has made in the last 10 years, this one might drive me off the site. 

As an aside, I believe the Big A already requires sellers to refund for any and all INRs whether they have proof of delivery or not.

[labs118]

General question 

So this means all bets are off on everything Trinton , Griff or any other ebay employee has said about changing a shipping address after payment as long as it is in messages?

If anyone knows if this has been asked somewhere & answered please let me know. Thanks