eBay Policy Change/Seller Protection Change when Buyer uses a Freight Forwarder?

[mangorunner]

I have always been of the understanding that the Buyer loses protection under the eBay Money Back Guarantee when using a Freight Forwarding service.  If the Seller ships the item and tracking shows it was delivered to the address of record in the original purchase, and the address is that of a Freight Forwarding service, then the eBay Money Back Guarantee does not apply.  The policy explicitly says that "Items shipped to another address after original delivery" are not covered.  (Following the link provided, scroll down to the section labeled "Not Covered".)

However, in another forum, there was a recent post that indicated otherwise - or at least a new caveat/nuance of which Sellers should take notice.  Regarding their Buyer's return request, the Seller (poster) relayed the following details.  (I've paraphrased):

Called eBay and eBay said the whole freight forwarding thing recently got changed.  They (eBay) can now only reject a return request if the Buyer actually *says* they used a forwarder in an eBay message.  Apparently, the fact that the shipping address belongs to a freight forwarder is no longer enough.  The eBay Rep said that buyers are claiming that they *work* at the freight-fowarding company - things like that  - in order that they may still be able to make returns and file INADs/SNADs.  The eBay Rep said that only way to actually prove that they used a freight forwarder is with a Buyer message acknowledging that.

I had an obvious freight-forwarder sale the other day.  I took photos of the item, contents as packed before the box was sealed, the box, and the shipping label and sent them to the Buyer with the message "I see you are using a Freight Forwarding service.  Here are photos of the item as it is being shipped so that you have them for your records."  I received no reply from the Buyer.

Has anyone heard about this change?  Any recent experience in this area?  Is there truth to this policy change?  Are you now confirming the use of a FF with your Buyer via eBay message prior to shipping?

[mam98031]

---

@go-bad-chicken wrote:

---

@mam98031 wrote:

---

@papermoneyforme wrote:

---

@mam98031 wrote:

I think that it really depends on what you sell.  If I were a seller of electronics, I wouldn't want to ship to a Freight Forwarder.  

I've shipped to forwarders on a regular basis for years.  With very few problems at all.

Besides, there is no block available to a seller that can prevent an international buyer with a US ship to address from purchasing.  So cancelling a sale that has a freight forwarder involved would be far more damaging to the health of a selling account.  Well unless the seller wasn't telling the truth when filing the cancellation.

@thehonorabletrader 

---

Yes there is.

Block all non US Paypal  payments.

---

Then you are blocking the buyer's ability to pay you, not blocking the transaction from happening in Ebay.  The buyer breaches no rule in Ebay.  But the seller intentionally blocking the buyer's ability to pay is a problem with the seller.  I've heard of sellers doing this and then filing a UID on the buyer, which to me is outrageous because it is the seller that won't let the buyer pay, NOT the buyer isn't willing to pay.  

The seller still has the transaction in Ebay to deal with.

---

I suppose that it is all based on a seller's perspective. The pay pal block exist so that sellers can choose not to incur an additional 1.4% currency conversion fee on top of the standard 2.9% pay pal fee. 

So it is possible that the sellers who are opening those UIDs are wanting to be paid in US dollars and do not wish to incur the additional 1.4% currency conversion fee.

I personally do not do this but I can see why others might choose to.

---

@go-bad-chicken 

Because they can do this doesn't mean they should do this.

To put a strike on someone's account when they did absolutely NOTHING wrong.  In fact the seller BLOCKED them from being able to complete the transaction and then blamed the buyer.  That is wrong on many levels.

I get it that some sellers just don't want to deal with these types of sales.  Fine, that is their right not to want to do it.  But that doesn't mean that someone else's account should pay the price when they did NOTHING wrong.

The SELLER decided they didn't want to deal with the transaction, so the SELLER should take ownership for that decision and the SELLER should take the hit to their account stats, NOT the buyer.

Fine if a seller wants to do this, but then take ownership of your decision and take responsibility for your decision / actions.  

[Anonymous]

---

@mam98031 wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@mam98031 wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@mangorunner wrote:

I have always been of the understanding that the Buyer loses protection under the eBay Money Back Guarantee when using a Freight Forwarding service.  If the Seller ships the item and tracking shows it was delivered to the address of record in the original purchase, and the address is that of a Freight Forwarding service, then the eBay Money Back Guarantee does not apply.  The policy explicitly says that "Items shipped to another address after original delivery" are not covered.  (Following the link provided, scroll down to the section labeled "Not Covered".)

However, in another forum, there was a recent post that indicated otherwise - or at least a new caveat/nuance of which Sellers should take notice.  Regarding their Buyer's return request, the Seller (poster) relayed the following details.  (I've paraphrased):

Called eBay and eBay said the whole freight forwarding thing recently got changed.  They (eBay) can now only reject a return request if the Buyer actually *says* they used a forwarder in an eBay message.  Apparently, the fact that the shipping address belongs to a freight forwarder is no longer enough.  The eBay Rep said that buyers are claiming that they *work* at the freight-fowarding company - things like that  - in order that they may still be able to make returns and file INADs/SNADs.  The eBay Rep said that only way to actually prove that they used a freight forwarder is with a Buyer message acknowledging that.

I had an obvious freight-forwarder sale the other day.  I took photos of the item, contents as packed before the box was sealed, the box, and the shipping label and sent them to the Buyer with the message "I see you are using a Freight Forwarding service.  Here are photos of the item as it is being shipped so that you have them for your records."  I received no reply from the Buyer.

Has anyone heard about this change?  Any recent experience in this area?  Is there truth to this policy change?  Are you now confirming the use of a FF with your Buyer via eBay message prior to shipping?

---

Hi @mangorunner, when the delivery address is that of a forwarding service this is not by itself enough evidence to say the item was forwarded - forwarding companies have employees, and those employees may have purchases shipped to the office. I personally have all of my orders shipped to my office, as do many of my colleagues and friends. When there is proof that a buyer has had an item forwarded beyond the original delivery address, they would no longer be covered by the eBay Money Back Guarantee. To withhold protection from a buyer, we do require evidence beyond the delivery address being that of a forwarding company.

I know this may seem strange, but years ago I personally spoke with the owner of one of these companies who had a case closed against him for a high value item because the assumption was made that the item was forwarded (don't worry, we corrected our mistake for this buyer). Additionally, many forwarding services will inspect and retain the item for their customers if this option is selected. I've worked with many of these companies personally when I worked in our Money Back Guarantee department. These are just a couple of examples of why we do not use the address by itself as evidence of an item being forwarded.

That being said, we can see if the address shipped to is a forwarding address and will consider this in conjunction with other details when reviewing the case to determine if the transaction qualifies for protection. You are welcome to contact Customer Service to review the specific details of your transaction if you have any concerns.

---

@Anonymous 

Excellent description.   Just one more question.  Is it enough to show that it was shipped to another address if the buyer that has filed a INAD is shipping it back from a totally different address, likely an international address?

---

Hi @mam98031, I can't say that definitively this would be proof, though it could be a strong indicator of an item being forwarded. Since a buyer is still protected if they have retained possession of an item when traveling or relocating, we would generally need more than just a buyer being in another location to confirm the item was forwarded.

---

Interesting.  So we are held responsible for how a buyer may pack an item when they move it to a different address other than the original ship to address???  So the "reshipping" has to be done by a legit carrier?

@Anonymous 

---

Hi @mam98031, there wouldn't be any more reason to assume the buyer moved an item carelessly than there is reason to assume they mishandled it carelessly in the same location it was originally delivered to. Either way, the issue lies in the item not being in the buyer's possession after being delivered to the address the seller provided.  

As for the earlier question about cancelling an order, the seller can cancel an order without consequences when there is a problem with the buyer's address or when the buyer requests to cancel. The delivery address being that of a forwarding service would not be a valid reason to cancel the order in itself. Any situations where Customer Service is encouraging a transaction be cancelled simply because the delivery address is a forwarding service are something I can look into further for appropriate coaching if the date and approximate time of the conversation is shared.

I want to touch on some of the concerns being raised here and clarify that forwarding services are not a sign of fraud or a red flag in any way, they are simply an affordable shipping option for buyers located internationally. When a seller sees that an item is being shipped to a forwarding service, this should not be a cause for alarm - many sellers have done this in the past without even realizing it, with no issues afterwards. While we do offer protections when there is proof that an item is forwarded, the existence of this protection shouldn't imply that there is anything inherently dangerous about an item being forwarded. In fact, we partner with one such forwarder, Pitney Bowes, to provide the Global Shipping Program to our Community. 

[buyselljack2016]

---

@mam98031 wrote:

---

Because they can do this doesn't mean they should do this.

To put a strike on someone's account when they did absolutely NOTHING wrong.  In fact the seller BLOCKED them from being able to complete the transaction and then blamed the buyer.  That is wrong on many levels.

I get it that some sellers just don't want to deal with these types of sales.  Fine, that is their right not to want to do it.  But that doesn't mean that someone else's account should pay the price when they did NOTHING wrong.

The SELLER decided they didn't want to deal with the transaction, so the SELLER should take ownership for that decision and the SELLER should take the hit to their account stats, NOT the buyer.

Fine if a seller wants to do this, but then take ownership of your decision and take responsibility for your decision / actions.  

---

I have non-us funded payments blocked on our selling accounts.

The IPR box is checked on listings, other than the occasional auction, so no UID opens, no strike for the buyer, as unless I misunderstand, the purchase can not be made when IPR is selected.

[go-bad-chicken]

---

@mam98031 wrote:

---

@go-bad-chicken wrote:

---

@mam98031 wrote:

---

@papermoneyforme wrote:

---

@mam98031 wrote:

I think that it really depends on what you sell.  If I were a seller of electronics, I wouldn't want to ship to a Freight Forwarder.  

I've shipped to forwarders on a regular basis for years.  With very few problems at all.

Besides, there is no block available to a seller that can prevent an international buyer with a US ship to address from purchasing.  So cancelling a sale that has a freight forwarder involved would be far more damaging to the health of a selling account.  Well unless the seller wasn't telling the truth when filing the cancellation.

@thehonorabletrader 

---

Yes there is.

Block all non US Paypal  payments.

---

Then you are blocking the buyer's ability to pay you, not blocking the transaction from happening in Ebay.  The buyer breaches no rule in Ebay.  But the seller intentionally blocking the buyer's ability to pay is a problem with the seller.  I've heard of sellers doing this and then filing a UID on the buyer, which to me is outrageous because it is the seller that won't let the buyer pay, NOT the buyer isn't willing to pay.  

The seller still has the transaction in Ebay to deal with.

---

I suppose that it is all based on a seller's perspective. The pay pal block exist so that sellers can choose not to incur an additional 1.4% currency conversion fee on top of the standard 2.9% pay pal fee. 

So it is possible that the sellers who are opening those UIDs are wanting to be paid in US dollars and do not wish to incur the additional 1.4% currency conversion fee.

I personally do not do this but I can see why others might choose to.

---

@go-bad-chicken 

Because they can do this doesn't mean they should do this.

To put a strike on someone's account when they did absolutely NOTHING wrong.  In fact the seller BLOCKED them from being able to complete the transaction and then blamed the buyer.  That is wrong on many levels.

I get it that some sellers just don't want to deal with these types of sales.  Fine, that is their right not to want to do it.  But that doesn't mean that someone else's account should pay the price when they did NOTHING wrong.

The SELLER decided they didn't want to deal with the transaction, so the SELLER should take ownership for that decision and the SELLER should take the hit to their account stats, NOT the buyer.

Fine if a seller wants to do this, but then take ownership of your decision and take responsibility for your decision / actions.  

---

I respectfully disagree with your position on this issue.

I will try my best to give you an example of why I believe that a seller opening a UID in these types of transactions could be considered justified.

In this example I am in the position of being the buyer. I purchase books from the U.K. off of eBay U.K., on a regular basis. Often times I want to purchase books, but the seller only wishes to sell and ship to buyers who have a U.K. shipping address. So I utilize a freight forwarder located within the U.K.. This completes one of two hurdles that I must jump in order to purchase a book or books from one of these sellers. 

The second hurdle that I am required to jump is payment. Now if this seller has the pay pal block enabled to only accept British Pounds Sterling, that is their right. And it places the the cost of the currency conversion fee (1.4%) on me the buyer. So in other words I the buyer am now required to pay that fee myself as the seller does not accept U.S. Dollars and only accepts British Pounds Sterling. 

So if I commit to purchase a seller's item and take that seller's item off the market that seller has every right to open a UID if I do not pay because I the buyer am unwilling to incur the extra fees to convert my U.S. Dollars to British Pounds Sterling at my expense and not the sellers. That seller has every right in my opinion to open a UID if they are willing to follow through with the transaction, but wish to be paid in their own currency. And the buyer has the opportunity to make good by completing the purchase by purchasing the seller's currency in advance from Pay Pal and then paying the seller. 

I hope that this makes sense.

[mam98031]

Thank you so much @Anonymous .  As always very good information.

[mam98031]

---

@go-bad-chicken wrote:

---

@mam98031 wrote:

---

@go-bad-chicken wrote:

---

@mam98031 wrote:

---

@papermoneyforme wrote:

---

@mam98031 wrote:

I think that it really depends on what you sell.  If I were a seller of electronics, I wouldn't want to ship to a Freight Forwarder.  

I've shipped to forwarders on a regular basis for years.  With very few problems at all.

Besides, there is no block available to a seller that can prevent an international buyer with a US ship to address from purchasing.  So cancelling a sale that has a freight forwarder involved would be far more damaging to the health of a selling account.  Well unless the seller wasn't telling the truth when filing the cancellation.

@thehonorabletrader 

---

Yes there is.

Block all non US Paypal  payments.

---

Then you are blocking the buyer's ability to pay you, not blocking the transaction from happening in Ebay.  The buyer breaches no rule in Ebay.  But the seller intentionally blocking the buyer's ability to pay is a problem with the seller.  I've heard of sellers doing this and then filing a UID on the buyer, which to me is outrageous because it is the seller that won't let the buyer pay, NOT the buyer isn't willing to pay.  

The seller still has the transaction in Ebay to deal with.

---

I suppose that it is all based on a seller's perspective. The pay pal block exist so that sellers can choose not to incur an additional 1.4% currency conversion fee on top of the standard 2.9% pay pal fee. 

So it is possible that the sellers who are opening those UIDs are wanting to be paid in US dollars and do not wish to incur the additional 1.4% currency conversion fee.

I personally do not do this but I can see why others might choose to.

---

@go-bad-chicken 

Because they can do this doesn't mean they should do this.

To put a strike on someone's account when they did absolutely NOTHING wrong.  In fact the seller BLOCKED them from being able to complete the transaction and then blamed the buyer.  That is wrong on many levels.

I get it that some sellers just don't want to deal with these types of sales.  Fine, that is their right not to want to do it.  But that doesn't mean that someone else's account should pay the price when they did NOTHING wrong.

The SELLER decided they didn't want to deal with the transaction, so the SELLER should take ownership for that decision and the SELLER should take the hit to their account stats, NOT the buyer.

Fine if a seller wants to do this, but then take ownership of your decision and take responsibility for your decision / actions.  

---

I respectfully disagree with your position on this issue.

I will try my best to give you an example of why I believe that a seller opening a UID in these types of transactions could be considered justified.

In this example I am in the position of being the buyer. I purchase books from the U.K. off of eBay U.K., on a regular basis. Often times I want to purchase books, but the seller only wishes to sell and ship to buyers who have a U.K. shipping address. So I utilize a freight forwarder located within the U.K.. This completes one of two hurdles that I must jump in order to purchase a book or books from one of these sellers. 

The second hurdle that I am required to jump is payment. Now if this seller has the pay pal block enabled to only accept British Pounds Sterling, that is their right. And it places the the cost of the currency conversion fee (1.4%) on me the buyer. So in other words I the buyer am now required to pay that fee myself as the seller does not accept U.S. Dollars and only accepts British Pounds Sterling. 

So if I commit to purchase a seller's item and take that seller's item off the market that seller has every right to open a UID if I do not pay because I the buyer am unwilling to incur the extra fees to convert my U.S. Dollars to British Pounds Sterling at my expense and not the sellers. That seller has every right in my opinion to open a UID if they are willing to follow through with the transaction, but wish to be paid in their own currency. And the buyer has the opportunity to make good by completing the purchase by purchasing the seller's currency in advance from Pay Pal and then paying the seller. 

I hope that this makes sense.

---

First the buyer isn't doing anything that is against the Ebay rules.  They are completely functioning within the rules.  As Trinton explained up thread just a couple of posts, this would not be acceptable for a seller to do this for the very reason the buyer is purchasing within the rules of Ebay.  It is NOT the buyer's fault they can't pay.  It is the seller that is preventing this action and therefore should not be something that harms the buying account in any way.

Like I said, while any seller can choose to go this route, that is their decision to make.  And they should be responsible enough that if this is the decision they make as the way they want to run their business, then they also need to take responsibility for the ramifications.  The seller is NOT suppose to file for a cancellation due to buyer address as that is not appropriate.  The seller should be filing for the cancellation of the transaction as a seller reason.

Your argument of the buyer making the purchase and taking the item off the market just isn't a reason to hold anything against the buyer.  The buyer is purchasing within the rules of Ebay.  Those are the rules the buyer is suppose to abide by.  

You should never expect a buyer to abide by the rules and the seller has the freedom to ignore the rules as they see fit.  Which is exactly what you are describing.  Punishing the buyer for abiding by the rules while allowing the seller to escape any negative impact to their account for circumventing the rule is just not right.

[pjcdn2005]

---

@go-bad-chicken wrote:

---

---

I respectfully disagree with your position on this issue.

I will try my best to give you an example of why I believe that a seller opening a UID in these types of transactions could be considered justified.

In this example I am in the position of being the buyer. I purchase books from the U.K. off of eBay U.K., on a regular basis. Often times I want to purchase books, but the seller only wishes to sell and ship to buyers who have a U.K. shipping address. So I utilize a freight forwarder located within the U.K.. This completes one of two hurdles that I must jump in order to purchase a book or books from one of these sellers. 

The second hurdle that I am required to jump is payment. Now if this seller has the pay pal block enabled to only accept British Pounds Sterling, that is their right. And it places the the cost of the currency conversion fee (1.4%) on me the buyer. So in other words I the buyer am now required to pay that fee myself as the seller does not accept U.S. Dollars and only accepts British Pounds Sterling. 

So if I commit to purchase a seller's item and take that seller's item off the market that seller has every right to open a UID if I do not pay because I the buyer am unwilling to incur the extra fees to convert my U.S. Dollars to British Pounds Sterling at my expense and not the sellers. That seller has every right in my opinion to open a UID if they are willing to follow through with the transaction, but wish to be paid in their own currency. And the buyer has the opportunity to make good by completing the purchase by purchasing the seller's currency in advance from Pay Pal and then paying the seller. 

I hope that this makes sense.

---

@go-bad-chicken 

You misunderstand how the system works.  When  an international-buyer is blocked because the seller had blocked payments from non US PayPal accounts, they would be unable to pay even if they had US dollars in their account.  The block is not related to currency but to the country in which their PayPal account is located.

 For example, I have a Canadian Paypal account but as I sell on both .ca and ,com I have both currencies in my account.   If I made a purchase from you and you used the non US PP account block, I would be unable to pay you even though I would be paying in US dollars and had a US address.   Since I would have no idea that I wouldn’t be able to pay until I tried to pay, giving me an unpaid item strike wouldn’t be reasonable imo.

Just as as an FYI the 1.4 % charged for an international transaction is an international transaction fee, not a fee for converting currency.  It is charged to US sellers on all transactions with an international buyer.  Also, the buyer always pays for the currency conversion and is charged approx 3%...there is no situation in which the seller would pay the conversion fee.  A seller is always paid in the currency they listed in regardless which currency the buyer paid in.  I often see the ‘advice’ to block other currencies in PP but that block doesn’t affect eBay sellers in any way because they are always paid in the listing currency regardless of any PP settings.

[fern*wood]

Does the country a buyer is registered in play into the decision of whether the item was forwarded or not?

[dasarock]

---

@mangorunner wrote:

---

@thehonorabletrader wrote:

---

---

This is actually an old policy. I would re-contact again and ask for different agent. This is an example of where policy is not consistent between different agents. 

---

Which is an old policy?  A requirement for a Buyer to acknowledge the use of a freight forwarder?  Was that an actual eBay policy at one time?

---

@thehonorabletrader wrote:

---

I would never ship to a freight forwarder...EVER. The reason for this is because eBay allows you to cancel for "Address Issue" since it's not covered and on top of that the buyer can still file a payment dispute outside of eBay or PayPal and possibly get a refund. I've experienced this scam before and I won't ever ship to a freight forwarder. 

---

I've always thought that a purchase by a Buyer using a freight forwarder was a cause for celebration, not reason a reason to cancel a sale.  Firstly, you have a sale.  A lot of my long-tail items take awhile to sell and so I'm always happy for a sale.  And as a seller, all I have to do is what I always do: ship the item on time to the address provided.  Once tracking shows that it has been delivered, my obligation is complete (or so I thought, until I read the story in my first post, above).  And didn't you say that the Seller should have called eBay back and spoken to another Customer Service representative? 

I've shipped many, many items to freight forwarders and never had a problem.  And if I learn that the story above has bad/wrong information, that it does not have to be documented in an eBay message, then I will continue to do a happy dance whenever I get such a sale.  It's a seller holiday.  I don't see the scam to which you refer.

---

brian@ebay 

brian, can you please verify the policy on this for us?

[dasarock]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@mangorunner wrote:

I have always been of the understanding that the Buyer loses protection under the eBay Money Back Guarantee when using a Freight Forwarding service.  If the Seller ships the item and tracking shows it was delivered to the address of record in the original purchase, and the address is that of a Freight Forwarding service, then the eBay Money Back Guarantee does not apply.  The policy explicitly says that "Items shipped to another address after original delivery" are not covered.  (Following the link provided, scroll down to the section labeled "Not Covered".)

However, in another forum, there was a recent post that indicated otherwise - or at least a new caveat/nuance of which Sellers should take notice.  Regarding their Buyer's return request, the Seller (poster) relayed the following details.  (I've paraphrased):

Called eBay and eBay said the whole freight forwarding thing recently got changed.  They (eBay) can now only reject a return request if the Buyer actually *says* they used a forwarder in an eBay message.  Apparently, the fact that the shipping address belongs to a freight forwarder is no longer enough.  The eBay Rep said that buyers are claiming that they *work* at the freight-fowarding company - things like that  - in order that they may still be able to make returns and file INADs/SNADs.  The eBay Rep said that only way to actually prove that they used a freight forwarder is with a Buyer message acknowledging that.

I had an obvious freight-forwarder sale the other day.  I took photos of the item, contents as packed before the box was sealed, the box, and the shipping label and sent them to the Buyer with the message "I see you are using a Freight Forwarding service.  Here are photos of the item as it is being shipped so that you have them for your records."  I received no reply from the Buyer.

Has anyone heard about this change?  Any recent experience in this area?  Is there truth to this policy change?  Are you now confirming the use of a FF with your Buyer via eBay message prior to shipping?

---

Hi @mangorunner, when the delivery address is that of a forwarding service this is not by itself enough evidence to say the item was forwarded - forwarding companies have employees, and those employees may have purchases shipped to the office. I personally have all of my orders shipped to my office, as do many of my colleagues and friends. When there is proof that a buyer has had an item forwarded beyond the original delivery address, they would no longer be covered by the eBay Money Back Guarantee. To withhold protection from a buyer, we do require evidence beyond the delivery address being that of a forwarding company.

I know this may seem strange, but years ago I personally spoke with the owner of one of these companies who had a case closed against him for a high value item because the assumption was made that the item was forwarded (don't worry, we corrected our mistake for this buyer). Additionally, many forwarding services will inspect and retain the item for their customers if this option is selected. I've worked with many of these companies personally when I worked in our Money Back Guarantee department. These are just a couple of examples of why we do not use the address by itself as evidence of an item being forwarded.

That being said, we can see if the address shipped to is a forwarding address and will consider this in conjunction with other details when reviewing the case to determine if the transaction qualifies for protection. You are welcome to contact Customer Service to review the specific details of your transaction if you have any concerns.

---

brian@ebay 

and if the buyer's registered address is outside the u.s. and the ship to address is a freight forwarder?

[gracieallen01]

---

@fern*wood wrote:

Does the country a buyer is registered in play into the decision of whether the item was forwarded or not?

---

@fern*wood 

Ah, but for the 'good ole days' - the early days of ebay.  More than once did I receive payment in GBP and more than once did I pay by sending GBP, by mail, without a problem.  I must admit, the U.K. was the only place it occured, but then, things were so much simpler when one could 'talk' to their client - and didn't have to ship by the stop watch.

[thehonorabletrader]

Follow up Question...

The Issue I ran into is that the Shipping Address on PayPal was a different Shipping Address than on eBay. I shipped to the address on the eBay Checkout, which is probably why I was protected by eBay. However, this may be why PayPal didn't protect me? How do you handle those situations? Because I feel like it's a lose-lose if you ship. Is that when it's "appropriate" (I guess if you can call it that) to Cancel for "out of stock" and take the defect so as to not violate eBay policy and remain accountable to them? I am fine with that, I am just curious how others handle that situation.

I haven't had a freight forwarding address in over a years, so perhaps the policies have been changed recently. I've learned a lot from this thread one way or another.

[mam98031]

---

@thehonorabletrader wrote:

Follow up Question...

The Issue I ran into is that the Shipping Address on PayPal was a different Shipping Address than on eBay. I shipped to the address on the eBay Checkout, which is probably why I was protected by eBay. However, this may be why PayPal didn't protect me? How do you handle those situations? Because I feel like it's a lose-lose if you ship. Is that when it's "appropriate" (I guess if you can call it that) to Cancel for "out of stock" and take the defect so as to not violate eBay policy and remain accountable to them? I am fine with that, I am just curious how others handle that situation.

I haven't had a freight forwarding address in over a years, so perhaps the policies have been changed recently. I've learned a lot from this thread one way or another.

---

You nailed it.

While the Ebay policy says you are protected if you ship to the address in Ebay OR on the PP payment.  PP does not share that policy.  They will only cover you if you ship to the address on the PP payment.  So it is always in the seller's best interest to always ship to the address on the PP payment as you then stay covered by both sites.

Always ship to the address on the PP payment, without exception.

[thehonorabletrader]

---

@mam98031 wrote:

---

@thehonorabletrader wrote:

Follow up Question...

The Issue I ran into is that the Shipping Address on PayPal was a different Shipping Address than on eBay. I shipped to the address on the eBay Checkout, which is probably why I was protected by eBay. However, this may be why PayPal didn't protect me? How do you handle those situations? Because I feel like it's a lose-lose if you ship. Is that when it's "appropriate" (I guess if you can call it that) to Cancel for "out of stock" and take the defect so as to not violate eBay policy and remain accountable to them? I am fine with that, I am just curious how others handle that situation.

I haven't had a freight forwarding address in over a years, so perhaps the policies have been changed recently. I've learned a lot from this thread one way or another.

---

You nailed it.

While the Ebay policy says you are protected if you ship to the address in Ebay OR on the PP payment.  PP does not share that policy.  They will only cover you if you ship to the address on the PP payment.  So it is always in the seller's best interest to always ship to the address on the PP payment as you then stay covered by both sites.

Always ship to the address on the PP payment, without exception.

---

But if I would have done that, then the eBay case that was opened by the buyer first would have been ruled in the buyers favor and he still would have been refunded under the eBay Money Back Guarantee. It seems like a lose-lose situation. I'll be happy when I can do everything under one site and one protection policy.

[pink.fish.rule]

---

@mangorunner wrote:

---

@papermoneyforme wrote:

---

---

Yes there is.

Block all non US Paypal  payments.

---

In PayPal, you can block payments from customers who have non-U.S. PayPal accounts only if you have a Premier or Business account.  You cannot block those types of payments with a PayPal personal account.

Source:  PayPal Payment Receiving Preferences

---

Won't be able to block them once you're forced into MP either.