Targeted By Malicious Buyer - False Returns

[autopiacarcare]

We have been targeted by a malicious buyer who has purchased 3 times from 3 different guest account IDs.

Order # 1 - Opened damaged/not as described case claiming the cap of the bottle was cracked in shipping and product had leaked out.  We processed full refund to close the case.

Order # 2 -   Return was filed as "Doesn't match description or photos" with the comment " Nothings came whats going on." -  Order was delayed by a day due to weather and was delivered the day after return was opened.  We sent buyer multiple messages with tracking updates, but did not get a response.  So, we approved the return on the last day possible to avoid getting a defect.

This return had a message on February 15th that said since the buyer had not provided tracking, we could call and have eBay close the case in our favor, which I did.  I even received an email from eBay stating the case had been decided in the seller's favor, closed without a refund to the buyer, and that it would not affect our seller performance.  However, after the case was closed, the buy provided a tracking number the next day and eBay reversed the decision, refunded the buyer, and is now showing this as an "unresolved" strike on our seller metrics.

Order # 3 -  This return request came in just as we were putting two and two together and realizing this buyer was targeting us.  Also filed as "not as described" saying he received the wrong brush.  Buyer will not respond to messages asking for pictures or more details (I know he's not required to provide pictures).  I reported all 3 IDs online and also called Trust and Safety.  Trust and Safety advised me not to authorize this return.  They said that in 3 days if I do nothing, it will escalate to eBay and they will close in our favor because of the fraudulent buyer activity.

However, when I called today to appeal the mark on our metrics for Order # 2, not only was I told they can't remove that defect because the buyer provided tracking, but I was also told that everything Trust and Safety said was wrong and that I do have to authorize the return for Order # 3.  So now eBay is going to charge us $10.84 for a shipping label for a $10.99 product and all they can say is to call when we get it back to appeal that case and "maybe" get the return shipping refunded.

It is incredibly frustrating to get so much bad information when calling CS and that there is apparently no hope for getting actual help when we are being so obviously targeted by fraudulent return requests.

[autopiacarcare]

---

@ersatz_sobriquet wrote:

Oct 11th all the malicious thief has to do is purchase on ebay with paypal and cancel five minutes later and the OP has incurred 2.9% in paypal fees. He could do this all day long. Horrors!

---

@ersatz_sobriquet  - I saw that they are bringing that back now.  If it continues to be an issue, the loss of those fees on canceled transaction could certainly be a tipping point as far as how far it is worth pursuing.

[autopiacarcare]

---

@threshold.sales.group wrote:

Fwiw, what doesn't make sense is the scammer filing a claim with his/her credit card company on an already refunded transaction? The basket for that transaction is already $0. It simply costs you the dispute fee.  IMO, no long term scammer is going to file unnecessary, pointless disputes, where from the start there is no chance of a monetary gain.  Especially with a victim that's already onto their gig. These have to be malicious purchases done solely for the purpose of harming your business.  

---

@threshold.sales.group  - I agree, at first it didn't make sense to me and I couldn't understand why they would go through the trouble but the more I thought it through, I came up with a theory.

Every transaction was a different email address/PayPal account.  When we look at these transactions in PayPal, the shipping address lists the scammers name and address, but at the bottom of the page it says

Paid By:  Bob Smith* (insert eBay guest account ID here)

*Bob Smith being a fake name to avoid getting moderated, each transaction has a different "Bob Smith", but we'll just use that to refer to the name of the actual owner of the PayPal account which is different than the ship to name.

My theory is that it isn't the scammer filing the chargeback, it's Bob Smith.  If the scammer is using a hacked PayPal account, he could use Bob Smith's card attached to that account to pay for the original transaction.  He either then does the whole fake return scenario to get a refund or we cancel and refund, either way if that money goes back into PayPal, the scammer could then divert the refund amount to himself instead of it going back to Bob Smith's card.  Bob Smith notices the unauthorized charge some time later and files a chargeback. Neither he nor his card company have record of receiving a refund for that transaction and it proceeds from there.

Please keep in mind this is only a wild guess on my part, but it would be one possible explanation of what he gets out of it.  $20 or $30 may not seem like much, but the smaller amounts may be designed to not trip red flags and if he's doing that multiple times a day with multiple hacked accounts, it could add up.

[myangelandmyprincess]

But how would anyone divert the refund somewhere else.  The refund is supposed to go back to the original cc.  Now if it was paid with a bank it will go back to the PayPal balance and that money could be taken 

[autopiacarcare]

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

But how would anyone divert the refund somewhere else.  The refund is supposed to go back to the original cc.  Now if it was paid with a bank it will go back to the PayPal balance and that money could be taken 

---

When I was researching this, I thought I saw somewhere that the money goes back to PayPal and then PayPal transfers it from there back to the card, but there could be a day or two delay for that.  My thinking was if the scammer was able to divert the funds during that time (transferred from PayPal to his own account or sent as a "friends and family" payment to a different account) then it wouldn't go back to the original card.

Of course now that I'm trying to verify that info, I can't seem to find it again, so I may be completely wrong.

If that's the case, then yeah the only other explanation is they are doing this just to mess with us because if they aren't getting extra money out of it, the chargeback doesn't make sense.

[autopiacarcare]

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

But how would anyone divert the refund somewhere else.  The refund is supposed to go back to the original cc.  Now if it was paid with a bank it will go back to the PayPal balance and that money could be taken 

---

I just had another thought now that I look at the email from PayPal again.  PayPal doesn't say "Credit Card Company", they say "Financial Institution".  So maybe it was a bank funded transaction and "chargeback" is any dispute filed by a financial institution, not necessarily a credit card company?

[emerald1830]

You mentioned the neighbourhood etc..here's a thought, most likely, those homes will have Ring or something similar..meaning they know who lives there..have you looked at public files to see who is the owner of the homes? That's pretty easy to find out...then do an online search for arrest inquiries...see if you can load up your ammo-file against these maggots..

[moonbloodstone]

What I was trying to say is that  a scamming Seller or a scamming buyer, who sends a magazine as the returned item, to any business/ house in the same zip code would be thwarted IF eBay required all items to be addressed with the plus-four code. 

I am not suggesting eBay shutdown any  buyer at that house. I am suggesting  that eBay Implement usage of the zip code +Four for ALL packages. Doing that would make it harder to say I sent a package to recipient to zip code Xxxxx and send it to a business address instead. The plus 4 is only for one address only. I put the plus four on all my online addresses. I don’t know if it helps...If nothing else it could discourage scamming.