Sold a phone AS-IS PARTS ONLY, now buyer wants a refund

[netseller_17]

I sold a phone listed as "parts only as-is. Phone can not be activated." Buyer wants a refund saying the battery does not hold a charge and want's a phone that works.

What is ebay's stance on a case like this?  Should I find out or is it not worth the hassle and just issue a refund? I'm not sure what about parts only was not understood in my description.

And a follow up question, what if I  get back the phone in worse condition that I sent it in?

[walwalwill]

---

@wills_thrill wrote:
You messed up and provided too much info in your listing. 

---

I'm sorry, what? Too much info? Seriously? That's your take away here?

It's not that they said too much. It's that what they said was hyperbolic to the point of being inaccurate.

I can describe every detail of something in 6  or more full length paragraphs without running into the issue that the OP did. Why? Because the issue has nothing to do with "too much info". It has to do with what info is provided, and, more importantly, the veracity of it.

[quinger86]

I just lost a SNAD case in my seller account for a printhead I had in the "For parts or repair" category and for which I had stated in my definition that I was selling it For parts or repair and not taking returns. Buyer said reason was that it was defective/didn't work, and eBay found for the buyer. In our messaging, it was clear that he hadn't actually read my listing. I was stuck paying postage both ways, and the item was returned to me in a condition where I couldn't relist it to at least recoup my shipping costs. Very, very frustrating. The only kind thing eBay did during the whole process was not give me a selling defect.

[gracieallen01]

"Great condition Galaxy S9. SOLD AS IS, FOR PARTS ONLY. It has a bad IMEI and can Not Be Activated. Fully functional. Has light and minimal signs of wear and use, but is fully operational and functions as intended."

How can a phone be 'Fully functional' if it can not be activated?   (was it originally a 'paperweight'?)