eBay - getting better for buyers, worse for sellers?
- Thread starter ededwards
- Start date
- Feedback
- View
ededwards":2u074zqo said:
turn up outside his house dressed like:
Whilst I see the point that ebay and paypal are seemingly increasingly favouring the buyer, surely the issue with parcels and whether they arrive, or not, is more down to DSR than ebay or paypal, per se.
As somebody else pointed out, the rules are the same, whether the buyer bought from a normal ecom website, some other mail order company, or ebay - until the buyer gets the item in their sweaty mit, the responsibility for the item getting there is down to the seller.
Now true enough, buyers that are savvy to this, can con the system. But DSR is intended to protect the buyer for reasonable cause. You will always get scammers. If you've got proof of postage, and it doesn't turn up, then you can claim back from the post office, can't you (up to a certain amount) - and if that amount isn't enough to cover it, insurance and / or insured registered delivery (at the buyer's expense) shoudl be insisted on.
With regard to ebay's recent changes to feedback, I'll state that I only use ebay as a buyer - but have for years. The only neg I ever got, was from a big seller, that I think either turned scammer, or his business went south. I was annoyed, because I'd made repeated enquiries about the item (by email, after about 10 days) about the item, got no response, eventually opened a dispute / claim, that got awarded to me (as the seller never responded). As soon as they ruled in my favour, I left (entirely correct and factual) negative feedback about the transaction, and only then did the seller leave me retaliatory negative feedback, and reported me as a non-paying-buyer. Although I contested it, by default I got a strike - which was subsequently recinded - but I never managed to get the negative feedback removed - even though it was a lie (it was completely untrue, and provable untrue to paypal), and retaliatory.
At the time, I also got countless other emails from people in exactly the same situation, and the seller got his account yanked. It still galls me that ebay wouldn't remove the negative feedback in that situation - I tried several times to get them to do so. After that incident, I was very wary about leaving negative feedback when justified, which I think was something that weakens the feedback system on ebay.
Because of that last bit, though, I do think it's wrong that sellers can't leave buyers negative feedback - I think that also weakens the feedback system. What I think they should have really done, is police the retaliatory feedback thing much better, so that buyers or sellers didn't get discouraged from leaving honest feedback, based on fear of what the other party might leave for them. Clearly they went down the easiest and no doubt cheapest method of dealing with that.
As somebody else pointed out, the rules are the same, whether the buyer bought from a normal ecom website, some other mail order company, or ebay - until the buyer gets the item in their sweaty mit, the responsibility for the item getting there is down to the seller.
Now true enough, buyers that are savvy to this, can con the system. But DSR is intended to protect the buyer for reasonable cause. You will always get scammers. If you've got proof of postage, and it doesn't turn up, then you can claim back from the post office, can't you (up to a certain amount) - and if that amount isn't enough to cover it, insurance and / or insured registered delivery (at the buyer's expense) shoudl be insisted on.
With regard to ebay's recent changes to feedback, I'll state that I only use ebay as a buyer - but have for years. The only neg I ever got, was from a big seller, that I think either turned scammer, or his business went south. I was annoyed, because I'd made repeated enquiries about the item (by email, after about 10 days) about the item, got no response, eventually opened a dispute / claim, that got awarded to me (as the seller never responded). As soon as they ruled in my favour, I left (entirely correct and factual) negative feedback about the transaction, and only then did the seller leave me retaliatory negative feedback, and reported me as a non-paying-buyer. Although I contested it, by default I got a strike - which was subsequently recinded - but I never managed to get the negative feedback removed - even though it was a lie (it was completely untrue, and provable untrue to paypal), and retaliatory.
At the time, I also got countless other emails from people in exactly the same situation, and the seller got his account yanked. It still galls me that ebay wouldn't remove the negative feedback in that situation - I tried several times to get them to do so. After that incident, I was very wary about leaving negative feedback when justified, which I think was something that weakens the feedback system on ebay.
Because of that last bit, though, I do think it's wrong that sellers can't leave buyers negative feedback - I think that also weakens the feedback system. What I think they should have really done, is police the retaliatory feedback thing much better, so that buyers or sellers didn't get discouraged from leaving honest feedback, based on fear of what the other party might leave for them. Clearly they went down the easiest and no doubt cheapest method of dealing with that.
Similar threads
