Am I in the wrong (as buyer of "for parts not working")?

[farfolomew]

Hi, I made my first big mistake as an eBay buyer in 10 years, or so.

I bought two computer parts (CPUs) that were listed as for parts, not working, but had possibly ambiguous descriptions. Neither of the descs said flat out they were tested as broken; in fact they didn't say much of anything and strongly hinted as being untested. My experience has taught me most untested CPUs pulled from machines are fine, which is why I bought them.

However, it turns out both were dead on arrival, and I felt bamboozled. Theres nothing that can be done to repair them, they can't be used "as parts" and this are paper weights.

Neither seller accepts returns and have denied my request for even a partial refund and me shipping item back at my expense, something that doesn't seem disadvantageous to them at all if they truly were unaware of the items working state prior to shipping.

Is this something I should take up with claims? Am I wrong for wanting at least partial refund for "parts/not working" items that I felt had, at best, an unclear description of their state of operation? If not, and I'm soley responsible, should a seller not be held accountable for possibly misrepresenting the status of an item despite selling it under a "not working" status?

[kattinsanity]

Since your seller sold these for parts not working he was perfectly honest in his description.  He doesn't know you~~he doesn't know if you may have taken parts from these computers and replaced them with junk parts or what you may have done to them. 

If he were to agree to a return and partial refund he doesn't know if what he would get back from you is what he sent.  He has a no return policy and you agreed to that when you purchased these items.  Honor your agreement by not attempting to return.  You HOPED to receive something other than what you purchased~~it didn't work out that way.

[ameri_kiwi92]

IMHO if "for parts" has any meaning at all, it means that, unless expliitly noted or obvious from pictures, the parts are all there but some or even all of them don't work.   I.E:   that rules out, as it should, that an item has not been taken apart, scavenged for parts and then reassembled.

Taking parts out of an item and then selling it for parts without noting which parts are not included nor even that some parts have been removed is, IMHO an outright scam and should be treated as such.  If this kind of abuse doesn't warrant returns it will kill the market for "for parts" items.  

It's all about sellers being honest and not trying to intentionally mislead buyers about what they are selling.

I'm getting ready to test Ebays practice on this as I received a "for parts" item that had been disassembled and had critical parts removed (parts that are not available on the market because they almost never fail and there's no demand).   It was listed as damaged (broken screen on smartphone) and sold as "for parts" with no indication that parts had been removed.   My intention was to attempt to repair it and I fully accepted the risk that parts other than the sceen might be non working.  But REMOVED parts was not part of that risk, most espescially not parts that never fail a could not conveivably have been damaged with anything less than total destruction far beyond what the photos showed.

IMHO it was a scam and I''m going to treat it as such (the seller buys and resells damaged phones so he might have received it that way, but still should have caught it because the screen had clearly been removed and stuck back without heat so it fell off at the flick of a fingernail and it was clearly evident that parts were missing inside.

The listing said "a few >pieces< missing from >back<  (and had listed wooden back)    "pieces" are not "parts" especially when a broken screen is the defect and "back" is not remotely things deeply inside and right behind the front (display).

IMHO it was intentional carefully crafted deception.

"for parts" implies that the parts are there (unless otherwise noted) but may or may not be working).  Some parts do not wear out and do not break and it is reasonable to expect they will be included.   Replacements for such parts are generally not on the market because there is no demand.  So if one is missing, if you bought it to repair it is worthless to you.

[dakotasmoke]

Sounds pretty scammy to return something described as broken to me

[ameri_kiwi92]

PS   I fully appreciate that, since the seller resells damaged phone, the scam may have been done by whoever he bought it from and his only error may have been missing what, IMHO, should have been obvious signs (display lifted at the edges and only loosely attached) that the phone had been opened up and then only lossely covered.

Anyone who makes a business of reselling damaged phones should surely be aware of such scams and inspect items accordingly   (If I was in such a business I would know the proper weight of every item and check for underweight as a standard part of inspection.     Smartphones have low enough weight variation that the removal of parts, even small ones, could readily be detected this way)

[ameri_kiwi92]

"Broken" does not remotely imply missing parts, most especially not that an item has been scavenged for missing parts. That seriously impairs the value of any item and is something that should be required to be explicitly noted on listings. And it takes only seconds for a very reliable check for that: Manufactured items have very little variation in weight and a simple weighing would make it very obvious in most cases when parts had been "scavenged".

It was described as "for parts not working" It is reasonable to assume that parts have not been removed. People repairing things well know what breaks down under normal use or plausible damage (and can evaluate the degree of damage from photos. They also know that parts that never fail under use nor are damage by any trauma less that almost total destruction are generally not available on the market and that a unit lacking them cannot possibly be repaired.

According to your statement, if I took a laptop and remove all of the parts inside the case not visible from the outside and listed it as "for parts not working" with no indication in the photos or description, that would be OK. I would submit that with such an interpretation, the "for parts not working" market would very rapidly drop to nothing.

[ameri_kiwi92]

PS  your overgeneralization with what IMHO is complete disregard for critical details is IMHO precisely why Ebay has the "not as described" option.

I have a 100% rating after being on Ebay for over 10 years and have won every one of the very few disputes I've had (all but one with full cooperation by the other party freely admitting that I was right and the one except was removed from Ebay shortly after for multiple reasons)

[rixstuff]

Any item on Ebay should still be useable unless specifically noted "for repair".  You bought the item "for parts" that implies WORKING parts.  Open a dispute and send them back.

[plumbingspecials]

The condition is listed as "not working"

That should have been your first clue. You were not babmboozled. 

[plumbingspecials]

"which leads me to believe they're fraudulently trying to pawn off their garbage on me."

You are the one who bought the item!

[dakotasmoke]

All buyers have a 100% rating.

[rixstuff]

---

@phcd1 wrote:

---

@farfolomew wrote:
...Is this something I should take up with claims? Am I wrong for wanting at least partial refund for "parts/not working" items that I felt had, at best, an unclear description of their state of operation?...

---

What part of for parts or repair only didn't you understand?

You received exactly what you ordered. I just don't understand some people sometime.

---

These parts cant be USED or REPAIRED.  They are flat out broken.  I buy jewelry "for repair" all the time.  They may not be wearable right out of the box but they CAN be repaired - they arent flattened or melted into lumps of silver.  I question the seller for selling parts that didnt work - what value did they have to resell vs justification for tossing in the trash?

[missjen831]

---

@rixstuff wrote:

Any item on Ebay should still be useable unless specifically noted "for repair".  You bought the item "for parts" that implies WORKING parts.  Open a dispute and send them back.

---

Thats incorrect. The actual item condition is "FOR PARTS OR NOT WORKING". Its not one or the other, under ebay's definitions, "for parts or not working" does NOT imply working parts-- "

"For parts or not working

An item that does not function as intended and is not fully operational. This includes items that are defective in ways that render them difficult to use, items that require service or repair, or items missing essential components. See the seller's listing for full details."

The buyer should NOT open an SNAD,UNLESS the listing specifically states that the SPECIFIC PART does work. 

[missjen831]

---

@rixstuff wrote:

---

@phcd1 wrote:

---

@farfolomew wrote:
...Is this something I should take up with claims? Am I wrong for wanting at least partial refund for "parts/not working" items that I felt had, at best, an unclear description of their state of operation?...

---

What part of for parts or repair only didn't you understand?

You received exactly what you ordered. I just don't understand some people sometime.

---

These parts cant be USED or REPAIRED.  They are flat out broken.  I buy jewelry "for repair" all the time.  They may not be wearable right out of the box but they CAN be repaired - they arent flattened or melted into lumps of silver.  I question the seller for selling parts that didnt work - what value did they have to resell vs justification for tossing in the trash?

---

And I question a seller who doesn't understand a "for parts or not working" listing and why buyers buy them. The parts may not work but that doesn't mean they cannot be repaired and buyers DO buy them to repair them and flip them. Consider iphones sold for parts or repair, the phone doesn't work but many people buy them to either harvest the parts that DO work, or to repair the phone and resell it for a profit. SNADS on for parts or repair phones is extremely common because buyers buy them hoping to fix them and then find out they can't so they want their money back.

[deep-garnet-red]

I guess I'll be in the minority and say that was a underhanded move on the seller's part. That being said, you shouldn't buy a part if it says the part is not working.

[ameri_kiwi92]

A bit of fulls disclosure, please:  are you a buyer or seller? (judging from your answer I'd put money on you being a seller).

You ignored the basic question and gave a response that (IMHO unduly) favors buyers while ignoring the key issue:     Is it or is it not wrong and misleading to sell something "for parts/not working" from which parts have been harvested without noting that some parts have been removed?      IMHO it is willfully dishonest ("with full malice aforethought") to do this.