cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Am I forced to pay a restocking fee on a return if it wasn't specfied in the listing?

I recently bought a computer monitor on ebay and I didn't like it so I started a return.  The seller accepted my return but wants to charge me a 30% restocking fee.  The listing did not mention any restocking fee ANYWHERE in the listing.  It just said....

 

Return policy
After receiving the item, contact seller within
Refund will be given as
Return shipping
30 days
Money back
Seller pays for return shipping

 

 

Do I pay this fee or should I contact ebay?  The monitor is in great condition.  I used it for less than a hour and only to test it.  If the seller didn't specify that they would charge a fee for returns.  I'm perfectly willing to pay return shipping.  I'd even be willing to pay a small restocking fee (10%-15%) but 30% is outrageous.  Maybe I should escalate this to ebay?  

Message 1 of 17
latest reply
16 REPLIES 16

Re: Am I forced to pay a restocking fee on a return if it wasn't specfied in the listing?


@kim_y_buran wrote:

@fern*wood wrote:

@kim_y_buran wrote:

If the listing specified free returns the seller has a right to issue partial refund.  I mean, not to sound harsh, but it's not seller's fault that you did not do you research, bought a monitor without ever seeing it and then decided you "don't like it".


This information is not correct and should not be passed on.

@kim_y_buran

 


I quote (emphasis mine):

 

"Starting June 1, 2018, when you offer free returns, you'll have greater control to manage your business, and you can decide to issue partial refunds to buyers. For example, if a buyer uses or damages an item and returns it, you can decide to issue a partial refund and we'll take it from there. If a buyer escalates a case, we'll take care of it for you so you can focus on your business. Plus, we'll protect your reputation from any negative feedback."

 

So, tell me again - how is my info not correct?


Because a seller does not have an unbounded right to withhold a portion of the refund, as your original post implied ... that is, if the reason a buyer returns an item is simply because they don't like it, the seller cannot withhold a portion of the refund.  eBay has policy guidelines on how to do partial refunds ... you might want to read through the policy, clicking on the items that can be expanded (particularly the Refund Deductions Guidelines Table).

 

One thing specifically mentioned there is this:

Misuse of this feature

This feature is incentive for you to provide buyers with exceptional experiences, such as offering free returns. This feature may not be used to recoup market losses on items returned in the same condition or recoup return shipping and restocking fees. It may only be used to recoup losses when an item is returned in a different condition than the original item. Sellers who misuse this feature may be subject to a range of actions, such as losing access to this feature, or suspension from buying, selling, or using other site features.

 

Message 16 of 17
latest reply

Re: Am I forced to pay a restocking fee on a return if it wasn't specfied in the listing?


@orangehound wrote:

@kim_y_buran wrote:

@orangehound wrote:

@kim_y_buran wrote:

If the listing specified free returns the seller has a right to issue partial refund.  I mean, not to sound harsh, but it's not seller's fault that you did not do you research, bought a monitor without ever seeing it and then decided you "don't like it".


That is wrong on two counts.

 

First, free returns are absolutely valid for "return it for any reason, even if you don't like it".  There are no restrictions as to the reason that someone can exercise a return.


1.  I was talking about not the validity of a return, but about the morality of "Ah, whatevs, it's gonna cost me nothing" purchases.


1.   It is not a morality issue if the seller specifically offers the benefit of free return shipping ..


You are absolutely correct.   It's a good faith issue and therefore belongs in the realm of law, not ethics.

Message 17 of 17
latest reply