Why does E-Bay continue to allow an unfair and dishonest VeRO process?

[wills_thrill]

trinton@ebay

I was just hit today with a VeRO claim from a company that is not listed on E-Bay's publicly available VeRO list.  Then E-Bay hit me with a 3 day restriction on my account.  The VeRO claim was that my item was counterfeit.

In reality, the item was authentic and not counterfeit.  The VeRo filer rescinded their claim.  It took an entire day and a dozen emails and hours on the phone to straighten the whole mess out.  Then E-Bay has the gall to say that it will take another 24-48 hours for them to remove the VeRO strike on my account!

Well guess what, 1 day to resolve the issue with the company, plus 2 days for E-Bay to remove the strike is 3 DAYS!  The full 3-day restriction punishment will still apply, with no recourse or compensation to me for it having occurred falsely!  I'm going to lose revenue for 3 days through no fault of my own! 

E-Bay has no grace period to allow a seller to address this issuer with the VeRO filer.  They just screw over their sellers immediately and irreversibly!

But it gets even better!  A rep for the company admitted that they have people in India searching E-Bay for counterfeit items.  They provide a list to corporate, and then corporate just takes down whatever listings India provides, without confirming each of them. 

In my case, the item was a product that has been discontinued since 2018.  The workers in India only know the current product offerings.   SINCE MY ITEM WAS NOT A CURRENT OFFERING, THE INDIA WORKERS ASSUME IT IS COUNTERFEIT, SO IT GETS FILED FOR A VeRO!

This is total **bleep** and a total abuse of E-Bay sellers, that E-Bay allows to happen by using a flawed VeRO system.

No account restrictions should occur until after a grace period for a seller to either resolve the dispute, or file a counterclaim.  It's one thing to take down the one listing incorrectly over a VeRO claim. 

It is entirely another thing to issue an account restriction that affects a seller's revenue stream irreversibly, because of a falso VeRO filing!

E-Bay needs to implement a new process immediately to stop the VeRO abuses that sellers constantly struggle with! 

No matter how many VeRO strikes on an account, when VeRO is filed:

1. the item is temporarily removed. 
2. A grace period of 3-5 days is given for a seller to address this with the VeRO filer, or by counterclaim. 
3.   After the grace period passes, if the seller hasn't resolved the issue, then E-Bay can issue whatever restriction is required based on account history.

At least this has some chance to be fair to the seller, unlike E-Bay's current police that is 100% UNFAIR!

[kythrill]

Well, over 48 hours have past and E-Bay still hasn't removed the VeRO strike against me or lifted my account restriction.

Again, 13 hours after confirming the false VeRO complaint, they restricted my account, 49+ hours now, and they haven't contacted me in anyway or lifted the restriction after the manufacturer rescinded the claim.

Why can't honest, paying sellers get the same or better service than non-paying manufacturers filing false VeRO claims?

[wills_thrill]

I don't know what happened there.  My husband had used my PC.  I was logged into E-Bay as me, but the discussions were logged in as him.  Then I logged out of E-Bay and then back in as me, thinking that would fix it, and the discussions were still logged in as him but my Ebay logged in as me...

[wills_thrill]

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Professional-eBay-Sellers/Help-with-VERO-problem/gpm-p/5133679/page/2

Sad how nothing has changed with E-Bay in 15 YEARS!!! E-Bay must enjoy abusing their sellers. It's the only explanation!

[wills_thrill]

Well, my account is still restricted. I have still heard nothing from E-Bay. In 3 more hours, I will have served my full 72 hour punishment, for something I didn't even do!

It has been 61 hours since a request to rescind the VeRO complaint, admitting their mistake, was sent to E-Bay by the claimant.

E-Bay's customer service should be professionally ashamed, if they have any integrity at all!

[wills_thrill]

Well, my restriction has lapsed and now my store, search, and listing privileges are all fully restored. The cost of this false restriction for something I didn't even do was a weekend worth of sales during my peak busy season! 😞

I still have not heard a peep back from E-Bay's VeRO team about removing the strike against my account, or lifting the restriction. I'll be sure to hold my breath until I get a sincere apology from E-Bay!

[Anonymous]

@wills_thrill trinton@ebay 

I would like add my 2 cents to this conversation and add Trademark Violations as well.  I don't think there is any fault with eBay's Policies for VERO or Trademarks but rather the enforcement of them.  The venue, eBay in this case, is the one who loses when incorrect enforcement occurs not Sellers because Sellers will find other venues to move their items. 

Perhaps its a good time for eBay to review how they handle alleged offenses in these areas.  I have had listings taken down and deleted on occasion.  One example I would share is this and I will keep it brief:

I won a lot of 6 Invicta Divers watches at an auction, these are very nice watches ... 5 sold very quickly but the 6th one, a 1959 Russian Divers watch did not.  It sat for a while and I finally thought maybe people think it's a bogus listing, why would Invicta (US company) make Russian Divers watches?  So I added the word "replica" to the title which in fact was a true statement and within an hour the listing was gone.  I came here and asked about it and was advised to NEVER list it again ... no problem and I took that advice, I sold it on another venue and thus eBay, the venue, lost their FVFs ... I didn't lose anything because it sold.  In my opinion, what SHOULD have happened was for eBay to take down the listing but NOT delete it and then message me to call to discuss it, make the necessary correction to the listing and get it back up for sale.  I have no doubt eBay has lost millions of FVF dollars because of the current enforcement process for VERO and  Trademark violations that at the end of the day are NOT violations at all. 

Hi @mr_lincoln, because ending a sold listing could still members of our Community to view it, there are situations where we must delete the listing to avoid any further VeRO issues. That being said, the suggestion you have provided is something we are looking into, and is already in place for certain policy issues. We'd love to implement this for more situations, so are working to expand this option where possible.

[gwens*4saleitems*]

Re: Why does E-Bay continue to allow an unfair and dishonest VeRO process?

Because they can. eBay's house, eBay's rules.

[mr_lincoln]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

@wills_thrill trinton@ebay 

I would like add my 2 cents to this conversation and add Trademark Violations as well.  I don't think there is any fault with eBay's Policies for VERO or Trademarks but rather the enforcement of them.  The venue, eBay in this case, is the one who loses when incorrect enforcement occurs not Sellers because Sellers will find other venues to move their items. 

Perhaps its a good time for eBay to review how they handle alleged offenses in these areas.  I have had listings taken down and deleted on occasion.  One example I would share is this and I will keep it brief:

I won a lot of 6 Invicta Divers watches at an auction, these are very nice watches ... 5 sold very quickly but the 6th one, a 1959 Russian Divers watch did not.  It sat for a while and I finally thought maybe people think it's a bogus listing, why would Invicta (US company) make Russian Divers watches?  So I added the word "replica" to the title which in fact was a true statement and within an hour the listing was gone.  I came here and asked about it and was advised to NEVER list it again ... no problem and I took that advice, I sold it on another venue and thus eBay, the venue, lost their FVFs ... I didn't lose anything because it sold.  In my opinion, what SHOULD have happened was for eBay to take down the listing but NOT delete it and then message me to call to discuss it, make the necessary correction to the listing and get it back up for sale.  I have no doubt eBay has lost millions of FVF dollars because of the current enforcement process for VERO and  Trademark violations that at the end of the day are NOT violations at all. 

Hi @mr_lincoln, because ending a sold listing could still members of our Community to view it, there are situations where we must delete the listing to avoid any further VeRO issues. That being said, the suggestion you have provided is something we are looking into, and is already in place for certain policy issues. We'd love to implement this for more situations, so are working to expand this option where possible.

---

Hey Trinton, thanks for the reply ... now THAT is good news ...

Mr. L

[wills_thrill]

I wish E-Bay would start by actually communicating with sellers, particularly when they are in the wrong and the customer is in the right. While my account restriction ran out because of time passed:

I still have not heard a single peep back from E-Bay about removing the VeRO strike from my account.

I have heard nothing back about when my item will be reinstated.

I have heard nothing back confirming they even received anything, from me or the VeRO member. I just have copies of everything that show it was sent to vero@ebay.com, so I know it was. But I have received nothing back in the way of confirmation.

No one at E-Bay will even tell me when the issue will be resolved. I was told by one rep 24-48 hours. Well, the rescind e-mail was sent to VeRO at 6:19 PM EST Friday, 77+ hours ago. So it is 24-48 hours from when?

I did nothing wrong and I am sitting here completely in the dark, was punished for something I didn't do, and have no idea when things will be made right, and know that I can never be made whole.

E-Bay has made me a victim and from where I sit, it feels like they could care less that they did it!

[bkjrst_51]

It has come to my attention, if a seller were to list enough unique items on ebay that seller would sooner or later run afoul of enough violations to have their account permanently suspended even through no fault of their own.

[myangelandmyprincess]

---

@wills_thrill wrote:
Yes, that is what I am referring. There have been many E-Bay users receive a VeRO (rightly so) for saying something has a Velcro closure, when it is hook and loop.

But it is quite understandable that a seller may not be aware that Velcro is a trade name, not an item. Does it make them a bad seller who needs to have an account restricted for one listing because they didn't know this difference?

The what if they put up a listing for bubble wrap the next quarter? That is a trademark, so Sealed Air could issue a VeRO.

Then what if they list a baby onsie a few months later. Wait Onsie is a Gerber tradename, not a type of baby product, so that could be a VeRO.

Then a few months later, they are trying to sell their old ping pong paddles. Wait! ping pong is a tradename, not a product. It should be table tennis paddles. Another VeRO.

Then a few months later it is summer and they want to sell last years windbreaker. Stop the press! Windbreaker is actually a tradename, not a product. There is another VeRO.

Well, now your account may be permanently suspended by E-Bay for these serious infractions. I mean, you are a horrible seller that needs to be kicked off the platform for these heinous listings!

Hopefully you get my point. And there are hundreds and perhaps thousands more examples!

E-Bay's process is broken and unfair and needs to be fixed. And it is quite possible that anyone of those examples above could be a false VeRO claim. Should their account also be restricted or suspended why they prove the claim false?

Guilty until proven innocent.

---

Getting punished for not knowing you did something wrong is not exclusive to eBay.  In the real world you commit a crime it doesn’t matter if you knew it was a crime you can be charged with the crime.  Infringe on someone’s rights even if you didn’t know you can still face fines in civil court.   It may suck but it’s how things work in general 

[wills_thrill]

No. In real life you would receive a cease and desist letter to inform you of the infringement. If you cease and desist, there would be no punishment.

It is nearly impossible to collect damages in court on IP violations, unless you can show the person acted in bad faith. This is why cease and desist letters are sent. It establishes a known point where the plaintiff can establish for certainty, that the defendant is aware of the existence of the IP.

Almost all laws require intent or bad faith to establish criminality. Despite the saying, ignorance is actually an excuse of the law. It's just that in many cases it is hard to establish ignorance (you can't claim ignorance as an excuse for dealing cocaine, because it is easy to establish that a reasonable person would know that is illegal). But does a reasonable person know that a jet ski can only be a Kawasaki, and other such craft are personal water craft? Depends on the jury.

In any case, any VeRO claim on E-Bay over these matters is a dispute, not a rule violation. E-Bay should removed the item during the dispute, and have a dispute period, where no punishment is doled out.

There are many cases where the VeRO claim is false, such as in my case. I have also known people who had VeRO claims over using velcro, and had to prove their item indeed did use real velcro. After doing so, the Velcro company rescinded the claim.

There are many examples of false VeRO filings, which is why these are disputes and not actual facts initially. So why would you dole out a punishment until you are certain a violation actually exists?

It is a claim, which becomes a dispute, and after a dispute period, it can become a rescindment or a violation. It is after this point where any punishment should be applied.

You don't sentence someone and send the to jail, before you hold the actual trial!

[wills_thrill]

And still nothing from E-Bay. It has now been 4 days and 4 hours since the VeRO member sent a rescind letter to E-Bay and E-Bay has done nothing.

The VeRO member actually reached out to me today to make sure this had been taken care of. I informed them it had not, and I had heard nothing from E-Bay. They confirmed they had received no response from E-Bay either, and said they would try to check with VeRO to see if they could get confirmation E-Bay had received their rescind request.

Tomorrow I plan to waste more time calling E-Bay's customer service. 5 days should be more than enough to take care of this!

I'm sure I will have some wonderful statements from E-Bay CS to post here tomorrow!

[myangelandmyprincess]

---

@wills_thrill wrote:
No. In real life you would receive a cease and desist letter to inform you of the infringement. If you cease and desist, there would be no punishment.

It is nearly impossible to collect damages in court on IP violations, unless you can show the person acted in bad faith. This is why cease and desist letters are sent. It establishes a known point where the plaintiff can establish for certainty, that the defendant is aware of the existence of the IP.

Almost all laws require intent or bad faith to establish criminality. Despite the saying, ignorance is actually an excuse of the law. It's just that in many cases it is hard to establish ignorance (you can't claim ignorance as an excuse for dealing cocaine, because it is easy to establish that a reasonable person would know that is illegal). But does a reasonable person know that a jet ski can only be a Kawasaki, and other such craft are personal water craft? Depends on the jury.

In any case, any VeRO claim on E-Bay over these matters is a dispute, not a rule violation. E-Bay should removed the item during the dispute, and have a dispute period, where no punishment is doled out.

There are many cases where the VeRO claim is false, such as in my case. I have also known people who had VeRO claims over using velcro, and had to prove their item indeed did use real velcro. After doing so, the Velcro company rescinded the claim.

There are many examples of false VeRO filings, which is why these are disputes and not actual facts initially. So why would you dole out a punishment until you are certain a violation actually exists?

It is a claim, which becomes a dispute, and after a dispute period, it can become a rescindment or a violation. It is after this point where any punishment should be applied.

You don't sentence someone and send the to jail, before you hold the actual trial!

---

Actually ignorance or not knowing the law is not an excuse.  Yes the laws often require intent but that intent isn’t “intent to break the law” it’s intent do whatever was done that broke the law regardless of if you know it was against the law.