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?

[phcd1]

---

@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.

[farfolomew]

The part where neither in the titles, nor in the descriptions, is it clearly stated they 100% do not work, which leads me to believe they're fraudulently trying to pawn off their garbage on me.

I'm offering to send the item back at my expense and accept a reduced refund. How on earth do they lose out?

[authentic*vintage]

I sell craft lots of jewelry on occasion. I am explicit in my description to expect that most items are not for wear, but are for crafting or repurposing or repair. Your seller did nothing wrong. You lost this one. You're counting on your seller's lack of knowledge to benefit by gambling that the part is working when it clearly states it isn't. You lost this one. 

As for what do you do? An apology for hassling your seller wouldn't be a bad first step.

[phcd1]

---

@farfolomew wrote:
The part where neither in the titles, nor in the descriptions, is it clearly stated they 100% do not work, which leads me to believe they're fraudulently trying to pawn off their garbage on me.

I'm offering to send the item back at my expense and accept a reduced refund. How on earth do they lose out?

---

YOU said "I bought two computer parts (CPUs) that were listed as for parts, not working", therefore YOU knew, or at least assumed they were not working. I'm sorry, I think you wrong. If it were me and you wanted to pay for return shipping and take my 20% restocking fee hit, I'd say no problem. But that's me. I buy a LOT of parts or repair only items, I never once thought of returning them.

Who's to say you didn't damage or kill the CPU's when you "tested" them. CPU's are very fragile. Do you use an antistatic mat, did you use a grounded antistatic wrist band when you installed them, Did you make sure the voltage and configuration was correct? I can think of a 1000 ways how they got damaged. They may have been working when you received them. Most B&M stores don't allow returns on CPU's and memory just for those reasons. I have decades of experience in the computer field and it amazes me how people treat electronics and then wonder why something is intermittant.

[takikawa4]

Yes, you're wrong. You bought items from the "for parts/not working" section and then are amazed they're not working.

[couldabeenworse]

Yes, I'm afraid you would be in the wrong to try to force any sort of refund. 

When an item described as "not working" is indeed "not working", it's hard to say that's not as described.

Even if they were described as "untested", you wouldn't have much of case.  But apparently they didn't even say that.

[needleinahaystack714714]

OH FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE.... Parts NOT working means parts not working.  You weren't bambozzled, you got what you paid for.

[needleinahaystack714714]

Another case of.... I feel cheated because I can't take this motorcycle scuba diving.

[creoleorchid]

Not working pretty much means not working to me. For parts could mean anything including the screws that hold it together. 

I know sometimes you get lucky and find something that's harvestable or easily repaired but sometimes not. This is the not.

[myboardid]

You bought on speculation, it was a gamble and you lost.  Take responsibility for your own actions. 

[johnrj1226]

---

@farfolomew wrote:

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.  Buying any thing for parts only & in not working condtions is a  **bleep** shoot. "Some days  you get diamonds, some days  you get just a  chunk of  coal"

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?

---

[thatsallfolks]

There are circumstances under which I would take the side of a buyer of a "parts/not working" item. This is definitely NOT one. There is only one part, the CPU; since the seller could not confirm that it worked, he listed it correctly.

You rolled the dice, and you lost. Filing a case would be dishonest.

[garmentvarmint2004]

FAR...

You  were  hoping that this  seller  was  so ignorant  about   computers---that he was   wrong  about  the condition  of   these CPU's   and  that they  would      turn out to be  fixable.  That   was  a gamble  that you lost.  I  cannnot  figure  out  why  you   would  think  this  seller owes  you  anything?

[robot-hands]

How on earth do they lose out?

---

By giving you money...kinda felt that was obvious.