Why can't I leave negative feedback for a buyer?

[cdreiss]

I know that I am not able to leave negative feedback for a buyer, but I would like to know why.

I recently sold an item but didn't get paid until I opened a case with eBay, even after I sent two very friendly messages. The process took a couple of weeks. This buyer has nothing but glowing feedback, which is so misleading because some of the comments from other sellers say they struggled to get paid.

What is eBay's reasoning on not allowing Sellers to warn other Sellers?

[the*dog*ate*my*tablecloth]

Many sellers think of it as free marketing. It shows future buyers that you care about them and their business. It makes current buyers happy and doesn't take a lot of time. 

If you only want to use it as a punishment then yes it's useless.

[around-the-block]

Because back in the 90s and early 2000s, negative buyer feedback was almost all retaliatory. The buyer would have a legitimate issue with the seller and leave neg feedback and the seller would leave negative feedback for the buyer even though the buyer did not do anything wrong. 

[around-the-block]

Did you read any of the 14 posts above yours?

[couldabeenworse]

---

@gvs wrote:

What good is a feedback system that only allows positive feedback?  Seems to me the system is really meaningless and a waste of my time.

---

That is certainly the case for feedback for buyers, and as eBay continues to lower the standards for feedback removal, it is quickly becoming the case for feedback for sellers.

[skatefool]

---

@gvs wrote:

What good is a feedback system that only allows positive feedback?  Seems to me the system is really meaningless and a waste of my time.

---

Pretty much... it's about as meaningful as a color sticker on a grade school essay.

[dbmm-media]

if you leave a buyer a neg it might hurt their feelings. 

[turquoisetulips]

---

@gvs wrote:

What good is a feedback system that only allows positive feedback?  Seems to me the system is really meaningless and a waste of my time.

---

The feedback system still allows negative feedback to be left  for  sellers . As a buyer I have found this   very useful . When a seller has  a low  rating   it can be concerning.  That's when  I'll  go check their feedback to see why before I purchase from them . If I read too many comments  about slow shipping , seller won't communicate , angry  or insulting responses  , poor packaging  or   damaged goods   then  I'll  go look elsewhere for what I need  . One or two  bad  comments  won't do it  but if  it's somewhat  overwhelming  then the seller is not a good risk IMO.  Tulips 

[turquoisetulips]

---

@skatefool wrote:

---

@gvs wrote:

What good is a feedback system that only allows positive feedback?  Seems to me the system is really meaningless and a waste of my time.

---

Pretty much... it's about as meaningful as a color sticker on a grade school essay.

---

I disagree . I've found that feedback left for sellers to be very useful .  Tulips 

[cashvaluerecovery2011]

That still does nothing to explain why buyers are able to trash sellers though does it? Buyers use bad feedback to extort sellers. Why was it a "mess" ,as someone else said, when sellers left retaliation negatives but today its not a mess for buyers to leave negatives on sellers? Its not like there arent unwarranted negatives or retaliation negatives left by buyers today. Ive literally had buyers say they wanted partial refunds or they would leave negatives. Luckily ebay will remove them if you can prove extortion.

Also ask yourself this. If sellers can magically "block" non paying buyers who have x number of UPI strikes............why is it anonymous? Why dont sellers get to see how many they have had? I have my store set at the minimum which I think is 2 but I would sure as heck block someone who already had one this week. I would LOVE to know this person recently failed to pay when they send me offers on high priced coins or jewelry.

So ask yourself the simple question and you will have the real answer. If negative feedback is bad and feedback all together is archaic then why do buyers still receive positive or any at all? Why are only sellers not only able to receive negative........but its shown in a very public way........and it can seriously effect your sales/metrics.............but non paying dead beat buyers or scammers are 100% protected from being noticeable by sellers?

Its because revenue is generated when a buyer purchases something. And a large percentage of scams and returns even will become revenue generators to ebay who take none of the risk. Its the same reason why fraudulent returns and outright scam returns where the items are apples to oranges are still found in the buyers favor nearly every time.

If you try to defend yourself and lose the case....which you will.......you dont get FvF back. If you get x number of returns from fake item not as described cases (aka buyers remorse) (aka ebay easy free rental) your account is dinged and FVF's go up. A certain small percentage of scammers wanting partial refunds will get them........and FVF is still paid to ebay on these.

Simplest answer = the more times buyers push a purchase button and the sellers take all the risk the more opportunity ebay collects revenue. Period, end of story. So why in the world would ebay want to run off anyone pushing purchase buttons even if they are causing some sellers to lose out? That is why you cant leave buyers negatives because sellers wouldnt sell to them or would block them. That is why non paying buyers is said to be done so automatically with no way for the seller to know or not. I would gamble and say they are not blocked.

A while back I had a person make me 3 low ball offers. They had 5 positive feedbacks that sellers broke the rules by telling the truth. Non paying buyer, scammer etc. I declined all offers and this person bought the item buy it now. Either nobody flagged them, which is highly unlikely since they risked their own accounts leaving bad feedback, or the whole automatic blocking thing is not really happening. That buyer btw said he never received the item but would take a partial refund since it was the post offices fault. When I said, your post master has you on camera signing the signature confirmation 4 hours ago it kinda puts a hole in that story. Would you like me to contact the mail fraud division for you they said "no thank you, never mind."

Goodluck sorry for the rant but hearing both sides at least gives you more info.

[cashvaluerecovery2011]

I agree with ya tulip. It use to be extremely helpful to see a buyers negative feedback in very much the same way. If other sellers were having a systematic patterned problem for a buyer I would refrain from doing business with them. We dont get that luxury anymore. And the percentage of fraudulent returns, and unpaid item cases, and outright scams has gone up along with our inability to weed out the bad ones.

[castlemagicmemories]

What is eBay's reasoning on not allowing Sellers to warn other Sellers?

Because there is nothing to warn them about.  Most times you don't know who your buyer is until they actually win or buy.  Filing the Unpaid, closing when appropriate, giving the buyer a strike, and blocking those with two strikes is more effective and it can't be used in a retaliatory way as feedback was.

[cashvaluerecovery2011]

Castle, I respectfully disagree.

There absolutely ARE things that could be warned about. Long ago, Im old and been here since 99, looking at a buyers negative feedback allowed me to choose early and often on who to block entirely. When I received messages from buyers wanting to haggle (now that is done through best offer most times) I could see if I wanted to deal with that person. Same as it goes now. Look at my feedback...you will see I sell way more to best offers than I do buy it now folks. The only info tool I have to keep myself safe from a bad buyer is to go look at their feedback left to sellers. So I can block them or choose not to take their offers ONLY if they are the type to complain a lot. A good problem buyer knows not to leave bad feedback leaving sellers no way to know what they are getting into. Granted the majority of buyers are great. But that one or two bigger purchase problems can cost weeks of profit.

I do file unpaid item cases every single time. I dont thing every has anyone paid me once I placed it either. Its been for me anyway, a week+ of guaranteed waste of time. I have recorded every single non paying buyer I have ever had and followed their feedback for up to 3 months. Not a single one them stopped purchasing and continued receive feedback which tells me either im the unluckiest guy there is, or nobody is blocking these folks, or the idea that they are getting blocked automatically is a farse.

Totally agree on using negatives as retaliatory was wrong by sellers and was abused. I hope you agree that buyers doing the exact same thing today is equally wrong. If buyers can warn other buyers about bad sellers , then why is it so much different the other way around?

[castlemagicmemories]

I hope you agree that buyers doing the exact same thing today is equally wrong. 

Of course.  I have often said there are bad buyers and bad sellers, and good buyers and good sellers.  If everyone had integrity, the world would be a perfect place, but lack of integrity sadly is not confined to any one group, and many have no consciences.  They think what they do is right no matter what.  The ends justify the means.  There is no self examination, no repugnance for what they stoop to do.  They simply don't care.  It is all about them.

Such is life.

I merely meant that if someone chooses to snipe an auction, you can't do anything about that.  If someone buys a fixed price, IPR, you can't do anything about that.  Over 80% of listings are fixed price.  

[monster-deals]

---

@cdreiss wrote:

What is eBay's reasoning on not allowing Sellers to warn other Sellers?

---

Ebay provides cover for bad buyer behavior to make more sales/money at your expense.

It will eventually catch up to them with billionaire investors sniffing around.

[cashvaluerecovery2011]

 We have the same philosophy then. I believe the same way you do.......just disagree with your point on sellers leaving negatives had no benefits. I certainly felt safer and I certainly had many many fewer returns and scam attempts. That could be a product of continued societal and moral breakdown........but if its ok for buyers to still have the option I see no valid reason that only sellers should be subject to the penalties and risks of negatives.