Unfair Treatment: 1 Order Counts as 11 Strikes—Impacting My Top Rated Seller Status

[holounlimited]

Hello eBay Community,

I’m reaching out to share a frustrating experience I’m currently facing as a Top Rated Seller and to highlight an issue with eBay’s automated system that I believe needs to be addressed.

In the past three months, I’ve successfully completed 1,065 transactions with 100% positive feedback. I’ve worked incredibly hard to build my reputation, and my customers have consistently been happy with their purchases. However, I’m now at risk of losing my Top Rated Seller status because of one single order—a situation that feels deeply unfair.

Here’s what happened:

A buyer purchased 11 individual trading cards from my store in a single transaction. The shipment, which is going to a military APO address, has been delayed in transit. Tracking shows the package is still in Chicago, even though I shipped it from Tennessee. It’s well-known that shipments to APO addresses often take longer to arrive, but unfortunately, the buyer didn’t receive their cards within eBay’s expected delivery timeframe.

The buyer opened cases for all 11 cards, and as the buyer was submitting each case in real time, I immediately reached out to provide the tracking number and explain the delay. I assured the buyer that I shipped the items and offered to issue a full refund once the cards were returned to me. The buyer never messaged me back. However, even though the tracking number shows the item is still in transit, eBay stepped in and refunded the buyer automatically.

Now here’s the problem:

Although this was one transaction, eBay’s automated system is treating it as 11 separate cases without seller resolution, one for each trading card. This single order is enough to cost me my Top Rated Seller status, which will significantly impact my sales and potentially jeopardize my entire business.

I contacted eBay support to explain the situation, but I was informed that it’s nearly impossible to have these cases corrected or removed because they’re handled by an automated system. Unfortunately, I’ve been through a similar situation before, so I know this to be true.

A few years ago, I lost my Top Rated Seller status after an eBay customer service agent gave me inaccurate information regarding eBay's policy. I was told I could sell digital codes on eBay and that providing the code through eBay’s messaging system would count as proof of delivery. Relying on this guidance, I sold digital codes, only to find out that the information was wrong. As a result, I lost my Top Rated Seller status—not due to any fault of my own (I called to check and verify before selling the digital codes), but because of misinformation—my sales plummeted for months. It was a devastating experience, and I promised myself I’d never let it happen again.

Now I’m facing a similar situation. Despite doing everything I could to provide excellent service and resolve the issue, I’m being unfairly penalized due to the way eBay’s automated system processes cases. Losing Top Rated Seller status over a single delayed order—especially one that’s beyond my control—feels incredibly unjust.

I’m sharing this here to bring attention to this issue and to encourage eBay to address flaws in the automated system that unfairly penalize sellers.

If anyone in the community has faced a similar situation or has advice on how to escalate this issue, I would greatly appreciate your input.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Sincerely,
holounlimited

[fern*wood]

I'm glad wastingtime posted the policy about the different buyer requirement.  Honestly, my faulty memory thought it required more than 4, but apparently not.   

OP--were the 11 purchases all from one ID?  I feel they must be, because I didn't think we could combine purchases together if different IDs were used. 

[luckythewinner]

---

---

 Despite my diligence, the cases were still decided in favor of the buyer.

There is nothing in eBay policy that states that "diligence" waives the need for Delivery Confirmation or recent movement in an INR. You did not have either, as far as I can tell. 

I took every step I could to handle the situation properly, but despite these efforts, the cases still counted against me.

The only way to properly handle an INR is for the seller to make sure the case is resolved the case before it closes. That is one step you could have taken, but chose not to. 

That aside ... 

I have no idea why that counted as 11 instead of 1, unless you are mistaken about what is required for multiple purchases to be considered as a single transaction. I do not have enough experience in that area to comment further. 

[jerseyboymusic]

@holounlimited 

Just for clarification... I have not read all the comments yet. When the INRs were opened, did you upload the tracking numbers TO THE CLAIM, or just "e-mailed to the buyer"?

They NEED uploaded to each INR claim

[bashort]

---

@714ricki wrote:

If you sell 11 separate items from 11 different ebay item numbers, then ebay is going to treat each item as its own individual transaction. Regardless, if the buyer just paid in one lump sum.  As unfair as it sounds, eBay has every right to treat each item as its own unique transaction.

✌️😎🙏

---

Then why does ebay have the following policy.

"You'll only be evaluated as Below Standard if your transaction defects are associated with more than 4 different buyers."

This is typical ebay, make a policy then totally ignore it because they either do not care or I think more likely lack the technical ability to code it properly, this is not the only place where ebay has clear policy that they just do not follow. 

[tobaccocardyahoo]

---

@holounlimited wrote:

 My goal is to attract buyers with competitive prices, encourage combined orders, and build long-term relationships with repeat customers. By offering low-cost individual cards, I create opportunities to secure larger combined orders, which is where I make my profit. It’s a strategy that has worked well for me, as evidenced by my 100% positive feedback and a loyal customer base.

---

This is not a novel strategy, and many sellers who have had the same strategy have decided to abandon it after experiences like yours. Not necessarily the first time they experience it.

Any seller who has low priced items, and relied on untracked shipping or ESE has a high risk strategy.

There are alternative strategies to build a loyal customer base, like rare products at higher prices and profits.

Any seller who posts here pointing to their 100% FB is a seller who does not understand that it is not a measure of seller performance. Not used that way by Ebay and should not be used by buyers. It can disappear just like your top ranked seller level with a streak of bad luck.

I have followers to my store who I have done business with on multiple sites for the decades. Interestingly, I have not sold under the same identity on multiple sites. They are my customers because of the match of my merchandise to their needs. I have minimum prices I will list at, and the sellers who sell the most common and least valuable products are quickly outgrown by serious collectors.

The guys who buy your cheap stuff are probably not the guys who buy your good stuff.

Your dollar listings cost Ebay as much or more overhead than other pricier listings, the only thing which costs Ebay more is having payments processed. ESE was created as a gift to sellers of cheap stuff, don't expect another gift for 5 to 10 years, if ever. I am sure Ebay did not predict the hidden costs to them of ESE.

[tobaccocardyahoo]

---

@gurlcat wrote:

---

Also eBay seems to consider a buyer as having only one bad experience when they try to leave a stack of negative feedbacks for a multi-item purchase. 

---

Ebay has always only counted one negative over a time period from one buyer, I think it is a month, but it display all negatives as separate transactions.

FB is useless and not used to rate sellers by other than people with crystal balls and naive Ebayers.

Whenever we see a thread about seller performance where the original post points out their 100% positive FB, we know they cased the problem they are being punished for, whether they admit it or not, whether they provide all of the proof or not. That is because they fail to understand how sellers are rated.

[chariot_badges]

You also may want to rethink shipping to APO/FPO addresses.

If eBay doesn't want you to ... why would you do it?*

* Don't go by their words, go by their actions.   eBay is obviously anti-military.

Too bad.   They deserve better. 

NO to APO/FPO addresses.

[timzbiz]

This is one of the many reasons why I no longer sell on ebay.

[714ricki]

Always support the troops & don't be afraid to ship to an APO/FPO address. 🙏✌️😎

[carlmarxx]

You  don't offer  Combined  shipping request  option   in the cart    ,had  you set it up  then you would  have  1 strike  instead  of  11  individual  item strike as  the other poster  said  .     

[stainlessenginecovers]

I always thought that 'ebay envelope' ONLY updated tracking to 'delivered'?? Therefore, it would not show much of anything, and if past the last estimated delivery date, the reason ebay simply 'closes in buyer favor' either automatically or when buyer 'escalates' since that tracking doesn't show much?? 

[gurlcat]

---

@tobaccocardyahoo wrote:

---

@gurlcat wrote:

---

Also eBay seems to consider a buyer as having only one bad experience when they try to leave a stack of negative feedbacks for a multi-item purchase. 

---

Ebay has always only counted one negative over a time period from one buyer, I think it is a month, but it display all negatives as separate transactions.

---

One of the only times I ever left a negative for a seller was such an extreme case that I negged him for all 3 items I had bought. LOL because he did so many awful things and the comment character limit was very short, I wrote everything as one comment divided by 3 parts, posting them in reverse order so they would read as a congruent statement, top-to-bottom.  It felt like a glorious accomplishment, but the next day only one of the 3 remained.  -I don't know if he had to request removal or if it was automated, but I recall seeing similar statements here (from buyers and sellers) about limitations on how many negatives, and negative comments, could be posted by a buyer for a multi-item order.

[gurlcat]

---

@714ricki wrote:

Always support the troops & don't be afraid to ship to an APO/FPO address. 🙏✌️😎

---

Wait, you're the same person who said on page 1:



If that is true, that sounds like a pretty good reason to be afraid.  No Delivered scan or delayed Delivered scan = potential disaster for the seller.

[sin-n-dex]

---

@holounlimited wrote:

Thank you for your response. I understand the point you’re making and appreciate the clarification regarding eBay’s Money Back Guarantee (Item Not Received) policy. However, I’d like to provide some context for why this situation unfolded the way it did and why I believe the system still treated this unfairly.

The buyer made their purchase on December 14, 2024, and I shipped the order on December 16, 2024, using eBay’s Standard Envelope service. The tracking information was automatically uploaded at the time of shipment and clearly showed that the package was delayed in transit, with the message: “Running behind, original estimate was Wed, Dec 18 - Mon, Dec 23.”

The buyer opened the cases on December 25, 2024, just two days after the delivery estimate and on Christmas Day, a time when postal delays are common. On the same day, I emailed the buyer for the third time, providing the tracking number again and including a screenshot of the tracking status showing the package was delayed. I explained the situation, apologized, and asked for patience while the package continued in transit. Unfortunately, the buyer did not respond and escalated the cases instead.

I acknowledge that eBay’s policy states sellers are required to refund buyers in these situations, but in this case, I believed it was reasonable to wait for the package to arrive, given the known delays with military APO addresses and the holidays. I had no intent to disregard eBay’s policy; rather, I was trying to handle the situation fairly for both the buyer and myself.

That said, this situation has highlighted a major flaw in eBay’s system. This flawed system makes it so that a Top Rated Seller can do everything right for years, as I have, and then make one single mistake on one order and lose their Top Rated Seller status. I made one single mistake, and now I’m losing my Top Rated Seller status. What message does this send to future potential eBay sellers?

If I had known this when I first started selling trading cards on eBay, I would have never tried to achieve Top Rated Seller status. And without achieving that status, I wouldn’t have had enough sales to build a successful business (trust me, I know the difference—sales plummet when you’re not Top Rated). If I had known how fragile the system was, I would have never started an eBay business in the first place.

Now, after spending years dedicating myself to building my store to make shopping easier for my customers—especially for trading cards, since variation listings are capped at 250 items—I’m losing my Top Rated Seller status over one mistake. This won’t just harm my sales for the next three months; it will also harm my reputation. Loyal customers who have trusted me will now see that I don’t have a Top Rated Seller badge and may assume I no longer provide premium service.

What eBay is essentially teaching sellers—especially trading card sellers—is that if you make one mistake, your business can be destroyed. That’s an absolutely terrifying reality. For me, it’s making me seriously consider moving my business to another platform where my years of hard work and dedication won’t be undone by one situation like this.

While I understand that a refund might have prevented the defects, the system’s handling of multi-item orders compounds the issue unnecessarily. I hope eBay reconsiders how these situations are processed in the future to ensure fairness for sellers and to encourage—not discourage—businesses to grow on their platform.

Thank you for taking the time to respond and share the policy link. It’s helpful to review and learn from this experience, but it’s also deeply disheartening to see how quickly a thriving business can be harmed by a system this unforgiving.

---

It's good to be aware that there's one defect for each item sold (although I don't know how they can do it when it's all the same transaction).

Why your way of resolving this was especially not good, is because if you had refunded the customer you could have filed an ESE claim and gotten the cost of those items. I always refund on an ESE when a buyer files an INR because I know I can get my money back from filing a claim. That's the whole point of ESE, it's insured. There isn't always a scan to show delivery, but eBay wants us to refund customers promptly with ESE and file a claim.

C.

[sin-n-dex]

---

@chariot_badges wrote:

You also may want to rethink shipping to APO/FPO addresses.

If eBay doesn't want you to ... why would you do it?*

* Don't go by their words, go by their actions.   eBay is obviously anti-military.

Too bad.   They deserve better. 

NO to APO/FPO addresses.

---

I stopped shipping to APO Addresses when eBay printed a label for me on their platform without a customs form, it got sent back, and Chit Chats charged me $7 to get it back to me. I figure if eBay can't be bothered putting the right label on the package, then I won't ship there, period.

C.