Is there an appeal process for the new metrics calculations?

[richard1rst]

In the past 90 day I have had, and been charged on the metrics, for 10 returns.

One of the returns stated “ordered by mistake”

One stated “didn’t like the item” BUT he never actually returned it, apparently changing his mind. (He said it was smaller than he thought, even though the dimensions were clearly stated in the listing.)

One stated “Didn’t like item” and they did return it.

One stated “arrived damaged”.

I can understand being charged a defect if I make a mistake. I have never made a claim of infallibility - I leave that to The Pope.

Is there a way to appeal the first three defects which are clearly remorse returns? The arrived damaged is borderline. There is no way to prove it was damaged in transit, as opposed to me sending it already damaged. I now I didn’t but you can not prove a negative so I’ll let that one slide.

Ordinarily I wouldn’t make a big deal of it. But with the new metrics where too many returns ups your FVF it becomes an issue.

[orangehound]

eBay's position is that false SNADs due to buyer's being dishonest are faced by all sellers, so false SNADs are factored into the "average" in one's broad category.  Thus, they cannot be appealed and changed (all you can do is report the buyer for abusing the Money Back Guarantee).

If I were to be kind, this assumption, like many others the decision makers at eBay make, is faulty.  More accurately, it is ignorant simply because these decision makers do not have sufficient selling experience on eBay and they do not listen to those who do.

False SNADs depend on what one is selling, and the rate of False SNADs can vary widely even within a category.

I get that eBay wants to reduce genuine SNADs, but the system they've created (like so many others) is not informed with real-world selling experience.  In my view, the best way to put a check on false SNADs is to penalize the buyers who are abusing the Money Back Guarantee.

[richard1rst]

Thank you for your response but it has absolutely nothing to do with my question.

I am asking about returns which are clearly stated by the buyer as remorse returns.

The first there examples I gave have nothing to so with SNADS, false or otherwise.

And to address the obvious follow up: Yes I know they COULD have claimed SNAD. But in the examples I gave they did not so SNAD false or otherwise is the not the bone of contention.

[missjen831 · Accepted solution]

Those aren’t true defects and only the ones filed as SNAD will be counted against you. Yes they are all showing up in your service metrics but when it comes down to eBay looking at your stats and comparing you to your peers It’s only the ones filed as SNADs that should be counted. So out of those 3, only the damaged return request will be counted when eBay compares you to your peers. 

[orangehound]

---

@richard1rst wrote:

Thank you for your response but it has absolutely nothing to do with my question.

I am asking about returns which are clearly stated by the buyer as remorse returns.

The first there examples I gave have nothing to so with SNADS, false or otherwise.

And to address the obvious follow up: Yes I know they COULD have claimed SNAD. But in the examples I gave they did not so SNAD false or otherwise is the not the bone of contention.

---

I was addressing SNADs because the service metrics only include SNADs and Items Not Received  ... they do not include returns that were marked with a remorse return reason.  Thus, I was assuming that your question had to do with falsely returned SNADs.

Your total returns show up under your seller standards statistics, but those are not the same as service metrics.

[pjcdn2005]

You should only be seeing snad returns in your service metrics.  Are you looking under Performance  - service metrics?