Long Story Short, A large ebay bits seller has banned me from buying their product because I gave them a valid negative review.
I have purchased dozens of bits orders from this seller over the years. Around Fathers Day ebay had a nice promotional code, combine this with this sellers "buy 10 things, get 10% off" policy and making a very large bits order was very cheap.
Unfortunately, for the first time ever, this seller let me down. After a rather unreasonable delay in shipping some bits were missing. Emails I sent were not returned, so I had to make a paypal claim. Eventually I got a refund, but this was still a negative experience in my book, and marked that one item as a negative on their feedback (with a dozen positives for the correct items). I am now banned from their ebay store.
Has anyone else had this kind of heavy-handed reaction to honest feedback?
There are always two sides to every story; plus don't forget a lot of ebay stores are just people running them out of their garage. So they are not always the most professional of people in knowing how to do customer services right; esp if they are normally pretty reliable and thus don't have many negative experiences - or only have them when a customer is trying to scam them.
On one hand, I can't blame him as eBay gives zero backing to sellers anymore and all the protection with claims etc. is all with the buyers, thus making them more susceptible to scams (I've been hit by one years ago (incidentally with bitz too). Only thing I could do was block them).
OTOH you're well within your rights as a customer to leave neg feedback. That's what it's there for. Many sellers will bend over backwards to avoid that negative hit (which goes back to the above paragraph). Not sure why they didn't try to resolve anything with you.
Yeah, it was strange. My total before shipping was almost $90. The bits I was missing were only $1.41. Seriously, do they think I'd try to scam them out of $1.41?
I know how you feel, I’m band from an eBay seller too
I had issues buying Volvo parts, so each time I went to buy something after it would give bogus excuses and wouldn’t let me buy said items, my basket would automatically empty
In many years of selling and buying on e-bay I only ever blocked one buyer.
This guy won an auction for one of many orc regiments I was selling. They were well painted OOP savage orcs and he paid around $8 a fig if I remember correctly. The photos showed the regiment from multiple angles.
He immediately complained about the price, even though I did not force him to bid. He demanded that they arrive intact or else. So I packaged them well and shipped them.
They got there intact and he was angry because not every model had a shield. Of course not every model had a shield, they are savage orcs. The command was not capable of carrying shields and some had 2 weapons or some other issue. The point is that the vast majority had shields and the pictures clearly showed the models and the fact that some did not have shields.
His e-mail was completely insulting and accused me of fraud and deception and demanded that I refund some of the money. I told him to return the regiment for a full refund, because at this point I was sick of his crap. Also the accusations really were over the top.
He refused to return the items and threatened negative feedback, which is a real killer for sellers. I ended up paying him a refund of about $1.50 per figure to shut him up. He went on the blocked list and all the emails were forwarded to E-bay and he was reported for feedback extortion. I have no idea what ever happened but I will NEVER sell to that person again. He was a terrible customer, completely rude and unreasonable. There was really nothing more I could have done than refund his money and pay for return shipping. To demand to keep the product AND get money back was ludicrous.
Having said that, I have shipped over 12,000 packages now from my small business and the overwhelming number of people are really decent. That one person did not taint my opinion of the rest of the buying and selling community. Most people are great to work with. But a tiny few are not.
Its just a thing of ebay, as bad a taste as it leaves. One of my favorite bitz sellers recently added statements all over their site saying if you leave a negative you will be blocked from future purchases.
there are people "IRL" so to speak who will try it on, there are also companies who are rip off merchants, not sure why eBay would be any different.
Sounds like you've not exactly lost anything here, where as the seller has lost a customer, gained negative feedback when they had the chance to avoid both.
This is partly why I don't sell stuff on eBay, just seems way more trouble than its worth
I suppose the ban could be pre-emptive, to avoid your giving negative feedback on future purchases. I wouldn't put it past a competing seller to pull a stunt like that.
Well consider that if they don't ban and someone gets pissed. They could tank a bits seller for less than $50 and there are people out there that would do it. Personally the only people I've had issues with on ebay was people I sold bits to son get it.
It has been a while since I was left negative feedback, but the few times it was left it was totally unwarranted. Given it is my livleyhood I am not gonna risk it. I block them every time. Infact if I get a question or query that seems suspect I too will block the bidder.
I'm not sure I really understand why the OP is complaining.
If I had an experience that warranted me leaving negative feedback, I wouldn't be caring if they banned me or not as I wouldn't be using them again anyway.
I just get the feeling the OP is more annoyed with himself for leaving negative feedback over such a minor thing and regrets it as he can't use the store again. Makes me wonder about the title of the thread.
troa wrote: It's fairly common to be blocked after leaving negative feedback. Just part of the system.
Then the system is rotten from the core if you can't give valid criticism without getting banned. Smells more like stores wanting to brush away problems they have. "no nothing wrong here"
It kinda is. Because negative feedback affects how much ebay charges per sale. Which means people being a-holes can cost full time sellers serious cash. So the idea of keeping people around who have a tendency to negative feedback is a bad idea.
troa wrote: It's fairly common to be blocked after leaving negative feedback. Just part of the system.
Then the system is rotten from the core if you can't give valid criticism without getting banned. Smells more like stores wanting to brush away problems they have. "no nothing wrong here"
Maybe it is rotten, but why would that seller want you as a customer either? I'd ban problem customers if I could.
The feedback system is supposed to be there to keep sellers honest by allowing people to see not just when they fail to meet someone's expectations but how they failed and what they did to resolve it. If sellers only permit people who leave positive feedback to buy from them, it defeats the whole object.
And appeals to hypothetical worst-case scenarios don't change that.
Maybe if someone is getting a lot of "problem customers", then they should do a bit of honest self-reflection and recognise that the one constant in all those transactions is them.
insaniak wrote: After that sort of runaround, I wouldn't be buying from them again anyway, so it doesn't really sound like much of a loss...
Indeed. Why would you have a negative experience, give them a negative review, and then try to do business again?
Sometimes only one retailer might have what you want; and if their overall rating is very high then sometimes you can chalk it up to just a single isolated incident. And given a few weeks both sides might well have forgotten the incident
In general some things are worth making a big stand over; others are mostly trivial small things that, yes they were wrong, but you'll forgive/forget
I mostly hold this to be ok for bitz sellers because as mentioned above if someone gets pissy they can cost the seller and additional 2% in costs for a relatively minor amount. So in my opinion it's in their best interests to essential ban negative review people.
That said I generally don't make a stand about $1.50 or whatever. I've had bitz companies send extra or less than what I ordered on occasion and I'm generally good with it as long as I got what I needed for my conversions. If I didn't and it's expense I might drop them a message and mention how much I purchase but I would probably rarely go to negative feedback. I don't rant about mcdonalds for forgetting my kids ranch for their chicken mcnuggets why would I throw a fit about a low cost item?
Yodhrin wrote: The feedback system is supposed to be there to keep sellers honest by allowing people to see not just when they fail to meet someone's expectations but how they failed and what they did to resolve it. If sellers only permit people who leave positive feedback to buy from them, it defeats the whole object.
And appeals to hypothetical worst-case scenarios don't change that.
Maybe if someone is getting a lot of "problem customers", then they should do a bit of honest self-reflection and recognise that the one constant in all those transactions is them.
Yes, that is true like over a decade ago.
eBay is all about the buyer now. Has been for quite some time. Sellers cannot even leave negative feedback on problem buyers (they used to be able to a long time ago. You can only ever leave positive (maybe neutral too) feedback as a seller.), so banning them is the only option they have after they've been held hostage by a crap system that does absolutely nothing to protect the seller anymore.
troa wrote: It's fairly common to be blocked after leaving negative feedback. Just part of the system.
Then the system is rotten from the core if you can't give valid criticism without getting banned. Smells more like stores wanting to brush away problems they have. "no nothing wrong here"
With ebay giving so much power to the buyer and no recourse to the seller, pre-emptively and swiftly banning problem customers is the only thing you can do to stop them from robbing you blind. With margins so slim in such a competitive marketplace it doesn't take many idiots to wipe out your profit.
I do feel that there should be a way to leave negative feedback for a buyer, but it should be limited. Buyers should only ever have negative feedback for non-payment and harassment.
If they ordered on Friday night, and are hounding you with multiple emails on Sunday about why there is no tracking number, well, yes that deserves negative feedback. On the other hand if they used a buy-it-now function, paid immediately with Paypal, and are asking where their product is 3 weeks later, no, a seller should not be allowed negative feedback.
As a business owner myself I view every comment as useful. If there is a problem somewhere I want to know where and what it is. The first step to fixing a problem is admitting there is one.
Honestly, if I was REALLY unhappy about a place, I wouldn’t want to use them again anyway. If I’m a longtime customer, had one thing go awry and tried to contact the company (then get ignored), I’d likely want to use them again at some point in the future.
I assume this is Horde O Bitz we’re talking about? They have this policy; they’re GREAT until one tiny thing goes wrong, then if you try to inquire they ignore you and block you if you leave any feedback other than a positive.
E-bay has gotten a bit interesting lately. Sales have plunged dramatically, to the point that my Amazon listings are outpacing E-bay by around a 30-1 ratio. Or more some days.
I got the below message a few weeks ago and it prompted me to do some research. E-bay uses "rolling blackouts" to help share business among the sellers it seems. Not sure if this is true but it has become much more difficult to count on E-bay.
Hello,
My name is XXXXXX. I'm from upstate NY.
I'm a big fan of your work, and have been buying your 30mm hex bases for a number of years now.
I play a lot of XXXXXXXXX, and resent the fact that the game's makers sell bases for $1 each. Yours are great quality, and a wonderful value.
I've been prowling eBay for a week now, and see that you don't have any on sale.
Can you tell me if you'll be listing any soon? I have a large number of mechs coming from overseas, and I'll need your bases to complete them.
Thanks so much. I hope to hear from you soon.
So not entirely sure what is happening. Online sellers have a lot to deal with currently. The new Supreme Court sales tax ruling could be ruinous, and the USPS providing subsidized shipping to Chinese sellers on E-bay makes it a very hard way to make a buck.
The vast majority of buyers are great to work with and sellers are also doing the best they can for the most part. It has been an overall great tool for me to buy and sell over the years.
eBay is definitely 100% about the buyer, and has zero help/interest in the seller. I can easily see many eBay stores/sellers blocking negative feedback buyers.
If the tax ruling goes counter to eBay and online sales in general it'll be a crazy windfall.
kenofyork wrote: In many years of selling and buying on e-bay I only ever blocked one buyer.
This guy won an auction for one of many orc regiments I was selling. They were well painted OOP savage orcs and he paid around $8 a fig if I remember correctly. The photos showed the regiment from multiple angles.
He immediately complained about the price, even though I did not force him to bid. He demanded that they arrive intact or else. So I packaged them well and shipped them.
They got there intact and he was angry because not every model had a shield. Of course not every model had a shield, they are savage orcs. The command was not capable of carrying shields and some had 2 weapons or some other issue. The point is that the vast majority had shields and the pictures clearly showed the models and the fact that some did not have shields.
His e-mail was completely insulting and accused me of fraud and deception and demanded that I refund some of the money. I told him to return the regiment for a full refund, because at this point I was sick of his crap. Also the accusations really were over the top.
He refused to return the items and threatened negative feedback, which is a real killer for sellers. I ended up paying him a refund of about $1.50 per figure
I would have reported him immediately and escalated to eBay, explaining that he received *exactly* what was pictured and described.
His options are to return for refund IN THE CONDITION IT WAS SENT, or to keep the items as-is. You did your part, and I wouldn't accept any BS from him. Buyer pays shipping to return for refund of original amount. Buyer is liable for any and all damages during shipment, which will be deducted from the refund amount. If your Ts & Cs mentioned a restocking fee, you should call that out as well. 100% "just business".
False Negs will be removed, and his account can be suspended for feedback extortion.
If I know I'm right, I won't take any crap from Buyers.
Right after I bought my home I bought a 1987 Monte Carlo and was going to fix it up. On thing wrong with it was that there was a cracked spoiler.
Quick e-bay auction later and I had an aftermarket one on the way, along with almost all of a new interior, Trans Am mirrors, rims, and some other performance parts (various sellers). Time slipped and about a month later I noticed that I still hadn't gotten my spoiler.
I sent the seller an e-mail, and waited a week. Another email, and a phone call that went to an answering machine (old school, not voice mail). After another week of more unanswered emails and phone messages I made an ebay claim. I got the refund, but two days after that I ALSO got a spoiler in the mail. Checking my email, I had one NASTY message from the seller.
He accused me of being a cheat and demanded either the money or the spoiler back. After inspecting the low-quality item (recasting issues and misaligned mounting bolts) I agreed to send the item back, if he paid shipping. I never heard from the guy again.
6 months later I sold it on ebay for $65 (correctly listed with issues noted).
Gallahad wrote: Leaving negative feedback about $1.41 of bits purchases you got a great discount on is definitely a crybaby move.
Shots fired!
But I also agree, the negative feedback was too much. In OPs situation I would have left no feedback for the mistaken item. OP got their money back, and presumably kept the incorrect bits, so what loss was there besides time? The seller is out the money for the auction, the auction fees, as well as a negative mark on their account. The loss of the incorrect bit(s) is on the seller for mixing up their inventory, but still could be counted in the loss column. Seems pretty one-sided in term of who came out as a winner and loser here, making the negative feedback wholly unnecessary in my opinion.
I've been selling more on eBay lately, so maybe I am just grumpy because I am getting the gak-end of the stick from buyers. Had over $500 in sales just fall through in the last week because one buyer flat out decided they no longer wanted their item, and another guy just vanished after asking for specialized shipping options. Once I gave him the quote *poof* the donkey cave is gone. So, yeah, a negative over a mistaken item that was refunded? F-that!
Gallahad wrote: Leaving negative feedback about $1.41 of bits purchases you got a great discount on is definitely a crybaby move.
Shots fired!
But I also agree, the negative feedback was too much. In OPs situation I would have left no feedback for the mistaken item. OP got their money back, and presumably kept the incorrect bits, so what loss was there besides time? The seller is out the money for the auction, the auction fees, as well as a negative mark on their account. The loss of the incorrect bit(s) is on the seller for mixing up their inventory, but still could be counted in the loss column. Seems pretty one-sided in term of who came out as a winner and loser here, making the negative feedback wholly unnecessary in my opinion.
On the contrary.
After a rather unreasonable delay in shipping some bits were missing. Emails I sent were not returned, so I had to make a paypal claim. Eventually I got a refund, but this was still a negative experience in my book, and marked that one item as a negative on their feedback
If the Seller chooses not to respond to emails, forces buyer to make a claim, that's a Negative right there.
The entire point of the Negative is to force Sellers to respond to issues for things as small as $1.41, for every sale, no matter how big or how small. If the Seller offers an item for $1.41, then they are responsible for fulfilling that. If they refuse to do so, then that's their fault.
If it were me, I'd have only given the Neg, none of the Positive. Feth that guy.
JohnHwangDD wrote: The entire point of the Negative is to force Sellers to respond to issues for things as small as $1.41, for every sale, no matter how big or how small. If the Seller offers an item for $1.41, then they are responsible for fulfilling that. If they refuse to do so, then that's their fault.
I am not defending the seller's behavior, however I think a negative should only be left when the buyer is actually harmed in some way through a loss. Cuda didn't really lose anything and was minimally inconvenienced. To throw around accusations of cry baby behavior I agree with Galahad, it's his, and not the sellers behavior that was immature. That negative was punitive, which would be fine if the eBay system wasn't so heavily skewed against sellers, and when even a few negative marks can drasticly impact the fee structure of the site. But since eBay's feedback system is so fethed, a negative should only really be left for serious matters. In this case, I think Cuda's negative was unnecessary and kinda petty. It was within his right, but still a bs negative in my opinion.
JohnHwangDD wrote: If it were me, I'd have only given the Neg, none of the Positive. Feth that guy.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: [ OP got their money back, and presumably kept the incorrect bits, so what loss was there besides time?
DarkTraveler777 wrote: [ Cuda didn't really lose anything and was minimally inconvenienced.
If by "incorrect bits", you mean "air" then yes I kept that. They didn't send me incorrect bits, they sent me NOTHING. I also did have a loss. All the other bits I ordered were for conversions that hinged around those missing bits. Bits that are now OOP, not available anywhere else, and the company that made them are stopping production of those pieces. I now have a $50 pile of bits that can't fulfill their original purpose. Perhaps I can one day find decent substitutes, I don't know.
Okay, I apologize, I misread your OP. So you didn't keep incorrect bits. Still, you got your money back and the fact that the bits are OOP and hard to source aren't the seller's fault that your project stalled. The internet is a big place, chances are that sellers bits weren't the last of those type in circulation. And if the whole project hinged on those missing bits why didn't you demand refunds and return the rest of the order? Why keep $50 worth of bits you can't use? That doesn't make any sense.
I treat every sale as individual. If you were only allowed to make one rating per "shopping cart" that would be one thing, but since I was allowed to make 13 various ratings I didn't feel right giving 13 strikes for an order that was 93% correct. Nor did I want to pay return shipping to end up with nothing.
No, what's BS is sellers feeling entitled to positive feedback just because positive feedback is a useful asset to have. I don't give a if a high feedback score is better for you, if you screw up my order that's a negative experience and you should expect to be rated honestly on it. I have zero obligation to let it go and pretend that everything was just fine so that you don't have to take a penalty for your failure.
JohnHwangDD wrote: The entire point of the Negative is to force Sellers to respond to issues for things as small as $1.41, for every sale, no matter how big or how small. If the Seller offers an item for $1.41, then they are responsible for fulfilling that. If they refuse to do so, then that's their fault.
I am not defending the seller's behavior, however I think a negative should only be left when the buyer is actually harmed in some way through a loss. Cuda didn't really lose anything and was minimally inconvenienced. To throw around accusations of cry baby behavior I agree with Galahad, it's his, and not the sellers behavior that was immature. That negative was punitive, which would be fine if the eBay system wasn't so heavily skewed against sellers, and when even a few negative marks can drasticly impact the fee structure of the site. But since eBay's feedback system is so fethed, a negative should only really be left for serious matters. In this case, I think Cuda's negative was unnecessary and kinda petty. It was within his right, but still a bs negative in my opinion.
JohnHwangDD wrote: If it were me, I'd have only given the Neg, none of the Positive. Feth that guy.
Oh, gee I am shocked that this is your outlook.
You shouldn't be.
I have done business on eBay and other sites for decades now, and my expectations are pretty high. A negative is warranted whenever a seller fails to do what they say the would do. If they ignore a problem, refuse to address it, then that is bad behavior that deserves a negative, regardless of whether it was $1, $100, 10,000 or $0.01. If I can be responsive within 24 hours, so can that seller. If the seller claims to be "too busy" then that's on the seller, and again, deserves whatever they get. If the seller didn't want the negative, they should have instead followed up and proactively addressed the problem, instead of hoping the buyer would give up. The seller's behavior is egregious and deserves to be made known. A legitimate negative feedback does that.
The only way it would have been a bullgak negative is if the seller had immediately offered redress, but the buyer refused with some sort of irrational demand (like the Savage Ork seller experienced). In that case, the negative would be disputed and removed.
My feedback is perfect, and I expect it to stay that way.
If a buyer has a problem, no matter how small, I address it immediately and fairly. I won't get jerked around, and I won't leave the other party hanging for days or weeks.
But if I did, and I got dinged for it, again, that'd be on me.
The real problem is that all mutual rating systems devolve into binary sytsems because people are generally lazy (and some game theory). i.e. everybody is either five stars or one, etc. Companies want to reward their best sellers/ drivers/ hosts, etc. so they offer perks for being on top, or more regularly, disincentives to being on the bottom. This further increases the rewards to leaving mutually positive feedback, especially for the seller in this case.
Cuda got his $1.4 back, and came here to complain about the seller blocking him for his "justified" negative feedback. Cuda now regrets choosing to defect (in game theory prisoners' dilemma language), because the seller doesn't want to deal with somebody that "defects" rather than colludes over such a tiny amount.
If $1.4 inventory error puts somebody in the same bucket as "took my money and didn't ship my stuff" for JohnHwang or Cuda that is fine. Leave the feedback, get your money back, you win. But then don't come to here to complain that the guy doesn't want to do business with you anymore.
Again, the point of Cuda's post is that he wants to do business with the guy again, and is upset that he got blocked.
For me personally, I reserve my negative feedback for people I don't want to do business with again, and certainly not for $1.4. The feedback sytsem works on a binary do/don't do business with kind of way. The dudes handing out negatives for tiny dollar errors just distort the signal.
Gallahad wrote: Again, the point of Cuda's post is that he wants to do business with the guy again, and is upset that he got blocked.
Indeed, which I don't understand. If the Seller can't be bothered to respond, why would you want to go back for more bad service? Bad service like that is often a sign that things are going wrong.
Gallahad wrote: Again, the point of Cuda's post is that he wants to do business with the guy again, and is upset that he got blocked.
Indeed, which I don't understand. If the Seller can't be bothered to respond, why would you want to go back for more bad service? Bad service like that is often a sign that things are going wrong.
Yes but sometimes the market is limited in what retailers are on offer. So sometimes you still have to trade with a less than stella seller because they are the only person selling what you want. Another aspect is if you've traded with them before and they've got a very good track record and there is just one hiccup along the way. One mistake is one mistake, but the ban means that the chance to trade is totally gone.
If bad service over a small amount of money doesn't warrant negative feedback, then why would good service for a small amount ever warrant good feedback?
This is like having your favorite restaurant serve you utter crap one time. Sure, you complain, they apologize, and hopefully the next time you come in they learned from their mistake. If they burn you again, then it might be time to find somewhere else.
No, what's BS is sellers feeling entitled to positive feedback just because positive feedback is a useful asset to have. I don't give a if a high feedback score is better for you, if you screw up my order that's a negative experience and you should expect to be rated honestly on it. I have zero obligation to let it go and pretend that everything was just fine so that you don't have to take a penalty for your failure.
No, what is BS is that there isn't a middle ground any more. There used to be a neutral feedback option which would be perfect for a case like this. While being ignored and having to get your money back through a Paypal dispute is annoying, and bad business on the sellers part, it isn't a colossal feth up. A large bits order was short one of twelve items. Yes, a bits seller should have a good Q/C process in place, but mistakes happen, and it wasn't like the seller did something offensive, outrageous or illegal. They dropped the ball. That an extremely punitive negative feedback is the only "option" available for buyers to express anything other than anal-exploding glee over their transaction is why Cuda is banned. The system doesn't allow for nuance which means both side go nuclear.
You've made your sense of entitlement as a consumer well known in previous threads, so I don't have an interest unpacking the last bit of your statement. Let's agree to disagree regarding the severity of the failure in this transaction. Yes, it was an unsatisfactory transaction, but was the infraction so egregious it was worth cutting off a bits source?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
cuda1179 wrote: If bad service over a small amount of money doesn't warrant negative feedback, then why would good service for a small amount ever warrant good feedback?
It doesn't. But, you also had the option to leave no feedback for that transaction, or for all of the transactions in that group purchase. Instead you brought a hand grenade to a fist fight and now you are banned. It sucks that an item was missed but was the bad service really *that* bad? There are so many things a seller can do to warrant negative feedback. Hostile communications, lousy packaging, misrepresenting what they are selling, are all bad practices that hurt the eBay community and are what negative feedback should highlight. Leaving out an item from an order and not responding are crappy, but they aren't necessarily intentionally bad business practices meant to harm buyers. Someone dropped the ball on your order, that is all.
Again, it was your right to leave the feedback because that is the system eBay has in place, I just think you overreacted.
The delay in shipping was annoying. That alone would not have made me give negative feedback.
Forgetting one item was annoying. That alone would not have made me give negative feedback.
Not responding to emails wouldn't necessarily elicit a negative feedback, as long as they pro-actively sent a refund.
Long shipping times, forgetting an item, refusing to respond, and forcing me to go through ebay resolution, that's what put me over the top. Short of outright fraud I don't see how this could be much worse.
And quite frankly, I feel that negative feedback isn't just for the absolute worst case scenario.
AegisGrimm wrote: Its just a thing of ebay, as bad a taste as it leaves. One of my favorite bitz sellers recently added statements all over their site saying if you leave a negative you will be blocked from future purchases.
Surely that is against Ebay terms and conditions though?
AegisGrimm wrote: Its just a thing of ebay, as bad a taste as it leaves. One of my favorite bitz sellers recently added statements all over their site saying if you leave a negative you will be blocked from future purchases.
Surely that is against Ebay terms and conditions though?
DarkTraveler777 wrote: No, what is BS is that there isn't a middle ground any more. There used to be a neutral feedback option which would be perfect for a case like this. While being ignored and having to get your money back through a Paypal dispute is annoying, and bad business on the sellers part, it isn't a colossal feth up. A large bits order was short one of twelve items. Yes, a bits seller should have a good Q/C process in place, but mistakes happen, and it wasn't like the seller did something offensive, outrageous or illegal. They dropped the ball. That an extremely punitive negative feedback is the only "option" available for buyers to express anything other than anal-exploding glee over their transaction is why Cuda is banned. The system doesn't allow for nuance which means both side go nuclear.
Again, so what? The seller failed to handle the transaction properly and generated a negative experience. Negative feedback is 100% accurate, and again the only reason you can come up with not to leave negative feedback is that the seller wants to have a better feedback score. And they aren't entitled to a better feedback score. Nor is failure to give them a higher than honest feedback rating "extremely punitive". If 95% of their transactions are successful then they get 95% positive feedback, even if it benefits them to have 99%.
You've made your sense of entitlement as a consumer well known in previous threads, so I don't have an interest unpacking the last bit of your statement. Let's agree to disagree regarding the severity of the failure in this transaction.
Yeah, because expecting a product to actually be delivered when I pay for it is just entitlement, and completely unreasonable of me...
Yes, it was an unsatisfactory transaction, but was the infraction so egregious it was worth cutting off a bits source?
Providing honest evaluation of a seller should not cut off a source. It's stupid that ebay allows you to block sellers in the first place, outside of dealing with scammers. Do you not see a problem with a seller saying "give dishonest feedback for my benefit or I will refuse to do business with you"?
There are so many things a seller can do to warrant negative feedback. Hostile communications, lousy packaging, misrepresenting what they are selling, are all bad practices that hurt the eBay community and are what negative feedback should highlight. Leaving out an item from an order and not responding are crappy, but they aren't necessarily intentionally bad business practices meant to harm buyers. Someone dropped the ball on your order, that is all.
No, things like misrepresenting an item should not be grounds for negative feedback. They should be grounds for being banned from the site and, in the case of misrepresenting an item (AKA mail fraud), referral to the police. Failure to deliver a product followed by failure to communicate when the buyer attempts to resolve the issue are grounds for negative feedback, because they are a negative experience and a failure by the seller. The only reason not to give negative feedback is this weird culture of entitlement ebay has, where sellers are entitled to a 100% rating unless actively engaged in criminal activities and giving honest evaluations is unacceptable as anything but a last resort. Criminal behavior gets negative feedback, poor customer service gets nothing, and adequate fulfillment of the responsibilities of a business gets you A+++++ AMAZING BEST SELLER EVER. It's insane.
After purchasing dozens of times (& several hundred dollars spent) I got banned from Horde of Bits for politely asking where my order was since it hadn't arrived after 45 days. I never got a reply from them,I sent out another very polite message a week later which also went unanswered so after two months I filed a paypal dispute. They still never communicated but uploaded tracking information showing that the item had shipped but it had disappeared in route and never made it to the Chicago hub that mail goes to before coming to my local branch. I ship stuff on ebay all the time and I know that happens so I requested that they send a replacement part or return my money but still no communication. I would have been willing to split the loss since it was due to the post office mishandling stuff. The dispute sat there unanswered without a reply so after two weeks I escalated it to a claim and again no response so paypal eventually refunded me.
It was a $17 purchase so the money wasn't a big deal and I really just needed the parts to finish my conversion so I tried to buy a second set of the heads but I'd been blocked on ebay. I hadn't left feedback for the failed transaction so it was a block put up prior to any feedback. They'd always been good about getting past orders out in a timely fashion but apparently they refuse to respond to any problems that come up, even ones that are valid. I ultimately left them a neutral feedback stating item hadn't arrived and had to file a dispute for a refund which I felt was more than warranted as I should have left a negative. A few hours after I left the feedback I get a rather angry message from HOB about leaving them "bad feedback" and I'm like wtf?? you can't bother to reply once in three months but you'll message me about leaving a neutral? (with rather hostile & profane language)
As long as everything goes well you're a welcome customer but they'll block you the instant anything goes wrong regardless of where the fault is. There's plenty of other bits sellers that I'd much rather my money go to.
I like Hordes of bits because they were cheap, had decent shipping rates, and got stuff to me fast. Customer service stinks to high heaven though. I think paying a buck more for an item might be worth not dealing with the attitude.
Peregrine wrote: Providing honest evaluation of a seller should not cut off a source. It's stupid that ebay allows you to block sellers in the first place, outside of dealing with scammers. Do you not see a problem with a seller saying "give dishonest feedback for my benefit or I will refuse to do business with you"?
I think you meant bidders, but no, it isn't stupid. This thread is an example of why blocking bidders is the only recourse a seller has to avoiding potentially problematic bidders. A negative mark is a serious thing for a seller to incur, so are you really surprised that they would deal with receiving one in a heavy-handed fashion?
I don't see the system as sellers demanding dishonest feedback, rather that bidders won't give honest feedback and treat anything other than exemplary service as grounds for a negative remark. By and large I think people have unrealistic expectations from eBay. I blame services like Amazon which expedited online shopping so well it has become "standard" to expect Amazon-level service for everything. I also blame eBay which bent its sellers over a barrel a few years ago and let buyers go to town by removing negative feedback consequences for bidders.
Sellers aren't demanding dishonest feedback, they are just asking not to jeopardize their margins because you got pissy with a benign mistake.
Peregrine wrote: No, things like misrepresenting an item should not be grounds for negative feedback. They should be grounds for being banned from the site and, in the case of misrepresenting an item (AKA mail fraud), referral to the police. Failure to deliver a product followed by failure to communicate when the buyer attempts to resolve the issue are grounds for negative feedback, because they are a negative experience and a failure by the seller. The only reason not to give negative feedback is this weird culture of entitlement ebay has, where sellers are entitled to a 100% rating unless actively engaged in criminal activities and giving honest evaluations is unacceptable as anything but a last resort. Criminal behavior gets negative feedback, poor customer service gets nothing, and adequate fulfillment of the responsibilities of a business gets you A+++++ AMAZING BEST SELLER EVER. It's insane.
Again, I don't want to go down the road of crazy that is your expectations as a consumer. I'll agree with you that there is a culture of entitlement on eBay but I'd argue it is the buyers, and not the sellers, who maintain that privileged posture. The feedback system is one-sided against sellers and many buyers know that and take advantage of that vulnerability.
It was to my great surprise and displeasure, having sold something to a buyer on eBay, that I had no choice but to accept a return. There was a problem with a sprue (it was slightly warped, and this was due to GW’s error in production, not anything I did). However, the bits on the sprue were not warped whatsoever. The buyer demanded that I give him some of his money back for selling him a faulty product. I said no, because there was essentially nothing wrong with it. Back and forth we went, but I told him I had a no refund policy and it was spelled out in the auction.
Cool story, bro. eBay gave me no choice in the matter, and I was forced to accept the return and refund his money as part of an automated feature. There was no “my side” of the issue, it was done.
I have since only had one complaint, and I don’t even remember what it was about, but as a gesture of good faith (and knowing I had essentially no recourse) I threw a few dollars his way to keep the customer happy.
Not the same issue as OP, but does go to highlight what I would call the bias favoring buyers.
I've heard of some buyers opening a PayPal dispute immediately after buying and not closing it until the item arrives with the seller having no recourse
dekinrie wrote: I've heard of some buyers opening a PayPal dispute immediately after buying and not closing it until the item arrives with the seller having no recourse
The Seller has the simple recourse of shipping the item exactly described.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: I think you meant bidders, but no, it isn't stupid. This thread is an example of why blocking bidders is the only recourse a seller has to avoiding potentially problematic bidders. A negative mark is a serious thing for a seller to incur, so are you really surprised that they would deal with receiving one in a heavy-handed fashion?
Yes, I meant bidders. And this is just proving my point: you're calling it "problematic" that a buyer gives honest and accurate feedback on a seller's failure instead of avoiding negative marks at all costs, no matter how dishonest you have to be to avoid them. What you're saying here is that sellers should be able to only sell to dishonest people and abuse the rating system to artificially inflate their numbers.
By and large I think people have unrealistic expectations from eBay. I blame services like Amazon which expedited online shopping so well it has become "standard" to expect Amazon-level service for everything.
You're also wrong here. Amazon-level service is the minimum standard that we should expect. They don't really offer anything exceptional, but when you buy something arrives on a reasonable schedule and you can be sure that you will receive the product you order. But apparently we're supposed to tolerate a certain percentage of screwed up orders and give that a 100% positive rating?
I also blame eBay which bent its sellers over a barrel a few years ago and let buyers go to town by removing negative feedback consequences for bidders.
There is no legitimate reason to give feedback on a buyer because a buyer is not providing a service to evaluate. They click buy or place a bid, and then provide their shipping and payment information on the order page. The only possible negative actions a buyer can take are things like scamming or feedback extortion, which are properly dealt with by ebay reviewing the buyer's actions and banning them if they are found to have violated the ToS (and referring them to the police in cases of fraud). The overwhelming majority of negative feedback for buyers was revenge feedback from sellers who felt entitled to add a negative score to anyone who gave them a negative score.
Sellers aren't demanding dishonest feedback, they are just asking not to jeopardize their margins because you got pissy with a benign mistake.
IOW, sellers are demanding dishonesty because they get better margins if they dishonestly manipulate the system to keep a 100% rating that does not reflect a 100% success rating in their transactions. Sellers are not entitled to the best possible margins just because they want to make money. If a seller only completes 75% of their transactions successfully then they should have a 75% rating, and I don't give a if this cuts their profit margins.
dekinrie wrote: I've heard of some buyers opening a PayPal dispute immediately after buying and not closing it until the item arrives with the seller having no recourse
The Seller has the simple recourse of shipping the item exactly described.
To be fair, a buyer opening a dispute immediately, before any possible grounds for a dispute could exist, would be a giant red flag that they're about to attempt a scam. There is no legitimate reason to open a dispute that quickly, and the seller should be able to cancel the sale at that point without any penalty.
Peregrine wrote: You're also wrong here. Amazon-level service is the minimum standard that we should expect. They don't really offer anything exceptional, but when you buy something arrives on a reasonable schedule and you can be sure that you will receive the product you order. But apparently we're supposed to tolerate a certain percentage of screwed up orders and give that a 100% positive rating?
What are you meaning by "Amazon-level service" here? I agree that abiding by your own stated terms of service is a minimum acceptable standard, but I would assume expecting all sellers to offer next-day delivery is unreasonable? Personally, I hold sellers with an Ebay shop to a higher standard - if you're running it like a business, then I'll treat you like one - no late dispatch because you were ill or on holiday or whatever. If it's a private individual, then I'll accept such delays as long as it's stated up front and communicated to me; If the listing says "all items dispatched on the following Tuesday" or whatever, fine. If I buy an item from some fellow and then get a message, "I'm sorry, but I won't get this posted until the end of the week as my child's ill", again OK. If I buy something, it doesn't turn up a week after the advertised date, and when I complain I then get the sick child story, not fine. If I order from "We Sell Bits!" and it's delayed for any reason, not OK.
AndrewGPaul wrote: What are you meaning by "Amazon-level service" here? I agree that abiding by your own stated terms of service is a minimum acceptable standard, but I would assume expecting all sellers to offer next-day delivery is unreasonable?
It means what I said: I buy an item, the correct item arrives undamaged on the promised schedule without me having to do anything but wait for the delivery guy to show up. Obviously expecting next-day shipping is not reasonable, but the delivery estimate on ebay would clearly indicate that you aren't getting next-day delivery. I would expect the package to go in the mail the following day, within 1-2 (business) days at most, and from there it's up to the post office. The key point here is that the transaction just works. I don't have to harass the seller for information or file a paypal dispute or whatever. I buy an item, I get an item.
AndrewGPaul wrote: I agree that abiding by your own stated terms of service is a minimum acceptable standard, but I would assume expecting all sellers to offer next-day delivery is unreasonable?
If the seller commits to shipping out by the end of the next business day, then I would expect that. The Seller specifies their handling time in the listing.
Personally, I commit to shipping out by the 2nd business day, but average less than 1 business day. It's totally doable, not unreasonable at all.
If a seller has it stated that they will have a package shipped the next business day, they should.
If the auction states that packages only get mailed on Fridays more than 24 hours after an auction ends, then the buyer should understand that as well.
That being said, a number of auctions I've bid on have had the "guaranteed 2-day shipping" listed in the auction, and instead were shipped by normal snail mail.
Wow, some seriously intense people on this subject. Ebay as a sideline extra way of getting rid of stuff simply isn't worth the hassle now. It's to easy to get scammed by buyers and everything is in their favor. Ebay has made it pointless for most non-business or at least non primary secondary source income of people to sell there.
I'm totally ok with someone banning someone for posting a neg review that could hamper 5% more of my income if I'm a major seller. It's their business and it says so in their actual auctions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JohnHwangDD wrote: Yeah, if you charge for expedited / Priority mail, but only ship slow mail, I'll expect something for the difference
Also I'd point out that depending on the size of the unit the cost is essentially the same less a few pennies nowadays so I'd tell you to pound sand. If they want to risk sending something without insurance by ground and save a nickel they can. Because that's literally the difference on normal sized packages now.
JohnHwangDD wrote: And yet, you're still saving those nickels by defrauding the buyer, charging for a level of service that you did not provide. I guess it's worth a Neg
Actually I was pointing out that pricing is essentially the same. Has nothing to do with "defrauding" if they charge a cost unless they advertise priority. If it's what you think priority should cost that's your expectation friend. Honestly by the time ebay, shipping (because everyone expects the exact shipping price but forgets boxes and packaging need to happen), and paypal costs are added in it's already an meh situation for a seller. Add in unreasonable expectations and a system so far on the buyers side it's not a surprise why sellers will blacklist whiny customers. It's the old version of "Don't like it, shop elsewhere".
The seller specifies how they will ship. If they say they will ship expedited / Priority, and they fail to do so, that's a breach of the contract, and they may be penalized accordingly. They took money for a service that they failed to deliver - that is fraud, and there is ample proof of that. If they fail to provide proper compensation, there should be consequences.
And I do plenty of selling on eBay, "friend". I ship expedited / Priority almost all the time. I don't try to save a nickel - I provide what I offered, simple as that. My service is excellent.
For the record, if you list expedited / Priority, but ship standard / First Class, I will dispute via eBay and expect ALL of the shipping charges to be refunded. If you give me any gak about it, I'll Neg you and hammer the gak out of your ratings. I know exactly how the feedback game is played, and I have no compunction about punishing a dishonest seller as hard as possible.
The difference between standard and Priority shipping may be small, however, if I'm looking at two competing auctions, one is priced at $25 with Priority, and the other is $23 with standard shipping, I'll go Priority most of the time.
If I end up getting standard shipping when Priority was promised, that just means I've lost money for no gain. And yes, that HAS happened to me before.
I'm curious. You do realize 'free shipping' is often used. Where would you dispute shipping charges in that situation? Assuming the seller selected expedited shipping and sent it economy.
Also, in my experience First Class is the same or nearly the same speed as Priority, with the exception around high-traffic seasonal periods. I sent a First Class package from NM to NY last week and it was delivered in 2 days. I sent a package 2-day Priority last year and it took over a week to deliver it to CA. No explanation for why even though the buyer contacted USPS about it. Trucks break down, weather causes problems, delays happen.
But as a seller, I always select economy and then boost it to expedited when the need arises, just to avoid any potential complaints from the buyer. Though most of my packages are under 14 ounces, so First Class is the most efficient.
As a buyer, if the package gets to me within the shown expected delivery date, I don't care if it was sent First Class, Parcel Post, or Priority--it got to me on time.
cuda1179 wrote: Long Story Short, A large ebay bits seller has banned me from buying their product because I gave them a valid negative review.
I have purchased dozens of bits orders from this seller over the years. Around Fathers Day ebay had a nice promotional code, combine this with this sellers "buy 10 things, get 10% off" policy and making a very large bits order was very cheap.
Unfortunately, for the first time ever, this seller let me down. After a rather unreasonable delay in shipping some bits were missing. Emails I sent were not returned, so I had to make a paypal claim. Eventually I got a refund, but this was still a negative experience in my book, and marked that one item as a negative on their feedback (with a dozen positives for the correct items). I am now banned from their ebay store.
Has anyone else had this kind of heavy-handed reaction to honest feedback?
Lack of details possible in this story.
I operate an eBay store. If I had a buyer order a large qty of items and claim some small amount were missing then try and get a full refund as the resolution I would block them.
How many bits were you missing?
Did you get a refund for the full order or just the missing items?
Did you try and work it out with the seller to get the missing items?
Etc.
You said it was a large order, if you were missing 1-5 dollars of bits from a hundred plus order then pushed for a full refund you are a very in the wrong, If that's not the case maybe the seller is spiteful, but this story seems incomplete.
Anytime eBay has a site wide sale, coupled with a holiday you should expect a shipping delay, it's the nature of that beast often.
Did you get a refund for the full order or just the missing items?
Did you try and work it out with the seller to get the missing items?
Etc.
You said it was a large order, if you were missing 1-5 dollars of bits from a hundred plus order then pushed for a full refund you are a very in the wrong, If that's not the case maybe the seller is spiteful, but this story seems incomplete.
Anytime eBay has a site wide sale, coupled with a holiday you should expect a shipping delay, it's the nature of that beast often.
I used the "Buy it Now" function to win multiple auctions. I was missing one of them. Originally I was only asking for those missing items to be sent, however, my emails were not answered. I eventually got a refund for, and only for, those missing items.
Did you get a refund for the full order or just the missing items?
Did you try and work it out with the seller to get the missing items?
Etc.
You said it was a large order, if you were missing 1-5 dollars of bits from a hundred plus order then pushed for a full refund you are a very in the wrong, If that's not the case maybe the seller is spiteful, but this story seems incomplete.
Anytime eBay has a site wide sale, coupled with a holiday you should expect a shipping delay, it's the nature of that beast often.
I used the "Buy it Now" function to win multiple auctions. I was missing one of them. Originally I was only asking for those missing items to be sent, however, my emails were not answered. I eventually got a refund for, and only for, those missing items.
Well that's a crappy experience. You can always open a new eBay account to order from them.
blaktoof wrote: Well that's a crappy experience. You can always open a new eBay account to order from them.
That's a bad idea - the seller would have a record of the shipping address, and would likely cancel and report.
It's really unlikely they will check, additionally you can send to a relative, your workplace, etc. They may cancel but unless you are harassing or scamming them reporting will not have any outcome.
AegisGrimm wrote: Its just a thing of ebay, as bad a taste as it leaves. One of my favorite bitz sellers recently added statements all over their site saying if you leave a negative you will be blocked from future purchases.
Surely that is against Ebay terms and conditions though?
How so?
It seems completely reasonable
You have a strange definition of reasonable. This is literally a threat that they will refuse to do business with you if you complain about their service being bad.
I would have expected this to come under "feedback extortion", because it literally is. But apparently Ebay are okay with this tactic.
Hulksmash wrote: Wow, some seriously intense people on this subject. Ebay as a sideline extra way of getting rid of stuff simply isn't worth the hassle now. It's to easy to get scammed by buyers and everything is in their favor. Ebay has made it pointless for most non-business or at least non primary secondary source income of people to sell there.
Ebay is rapidly dying. Like anything moribund, it's best given a wide berth at this point as a seller.
Interesting. I'd never thought of some of these points about ebay. I'm not active on e-bay any more, but when I was there was a guy I surely would have banned if I'd known about that feature, simply out of a desire to never, ever interact with them again.
It's interesting because I've sold many items with little to no problems. I think one time a themperosn won a bid but didn't pay for it so I had to reopen the bid... However, I did have one issue with a seller where I paid for an item with pretty high shipping. The item was a great deal though so it seemed worth it. I waiting for about a week and a half for something that should hve only have been 2 day max shipping and so just messaged the guy (didn't put any review down or anything) about the item. He told he hadn't even bothered to send it yet! So i waited another week and a half and 3 weeks later i still hadn't received the item. Sometimes it's great to have the ebay system though as i filled a report and within like an hour the guy refunded my money so geuss he was just upset the item went for so low on the bid.
I knew a military sales guy once though who sold a £900 (or £9,000 I forget) jacket on ebay. He was pretty professional so had insurance on it, tracked first class postage and everything! Guy who bought it instantly reported he never got it like a week later but the guy had full evidence that he had signed for it (even somehow got his signature). Ebay totally ignored the evidence and refunded him... later on he found out he was an infamous seller who does this with almost every high purchase. It's sad.
I had refrained from selling due to a couple bad experiences a short time ago (an overseas bidder who complained about shipping costs, despite the initial auction saying no overseas bidders - the second someone who never paid despite several e-mails requesting the buyer do so), and just did two recent sales with no issues.
I’d say about 90% or more sales go without issue, but it’s that 10% that leave really bad taste in people’s mouth - enough for them to decide it isn’t worth the gamble of dealing with a problematic individual; seller or buyer.
judgedoug wrote: Having used eBay since 1998, I agree with every seller in this thread -
eBay offers 100% support for buyers, and will refund a buyer if they complain and will not demand the item get returned.
Sellers have zero recourse for a buyer complaint. A buyer can absolutely lie and will get a refund.
The only thing that a Seller can do is to leave positive feedback or to ban the Buyer.
This ^^. Sold an item on eBay, shipped it. It arrived next day and was signed for. A few weeks later the buyer opened a case saying it didn't arrive and even though he'd signed for it eBay refunded him.
If you shipped to the Buyer Confirmed Address, with Tracking, you should not be on the hook. It becomes Buyer's responsibility to have a secure address for delivery, not Seller or PO. Seller may assist Buyer with the information needed for lost mail, but is not responsible for Buyer carelessly losing item after delivery
cuda1179 wrote: If the Seller used "Random Shipping Company X" and the company looses the package, that's all on the seller, right?
I used Royal Mail Recorded, and have a tracking number that states it was delivered to the correct address and signed for by the buyer. Buyer says he never received it, Royal Mail are saying they delivered it. I suggested to the buyer that he checks with housemates and neighbours. eBay claim was opened and they sided with the buyer (and didn't reply to my messages).
@cuda - that's partly correct. Legally, Seller is responsible to deliver. Buyer specifies a valid, secure delivery address. If my agent delivers to that address, and Buyer fails to collect, that's on the Buyer, not me.
If my shipping agent fails to deliver to the address (i.e. loses the package), that's on me. I would have to refund the Buyer and collect insurance from the shipping company.
____
@beast - that's not right - the fact that your shipper delivered it should mean you're not responsible.
The only way you'd be wrong is if you delivered to a wrong address (i.e. buyer specified different from the Order, and you were fool enough to use that instead)
JohnHwangDD wrote: @cuda - that's partly correct. Legally, Seller is responsible to deliver. Buyer specifies a valid, secure delivery address. If my agent delivers to that address, and Buyer fails to collect, that's on the Buyer, not me.
If my shipping agent fails to deliver to the address (i.e. loses the package), that's on me. I would have to refund the Buyer and collect insurance from the shipping company.
____
@beast - that's not right - the fact that your shipper delivered it should mean you're not responsible.
The only way you'd be wrong is if you delivered to a wrong address (i.e. buyer specified different from the Order, and you were fool enough to use that instead)
You seem to be under the impression that Ebay cares what's right or wrong when it comes to buyers vs. sellers because most people I know have a story similar to Beast and it's why they stopped selling. Maybe because you obviously sell heavily they give you more weight and you get different results or are willing to put in insane amounts of time to get it corrected but most of us don't have that kind of time for a side sell. So now it goes on local selling sites/facebook/craigs list.
judgedoug wrote: Having used eBay since 1998, I agree with every seller in this thread -
eBay offers 100% support for buyers, and will refund a buyer if they complain and will not demand the item get returned.
Sellers have zero recourse for a buyer complaint. A buyer can absolutely lie and will get a refund.
The only thing that a Seller can do is to leave positive feedback or to ban the Buyer.
This is not always true. I recently bought 2 canoptek spyders (where the seller was selling multiples of one each and I added two to my cart) and was only sent 1. After communication to the seller that I only received one, he acknowledged that in his reply and that he would send the second spyder. He never did. Two weeks later I opened up a dispute and ebay immediately sided with the seller and closed it, saying the package was shown as delivered.
I had to call ebay and talk to a representative and show them the email that the seller sent me saying he forgot to send the 2nd spyder, with several minutes of back and forth hassle When they finally sided with me, they told me to return the one spyder I received for a full refund, even though I wanted to keep it and pay half--they would not allow it.
So I sent it back and got the full refund through ebay. A few weeks later, I got the package back in the mail because the seller address was vacated. I checked that ebay account and it was no longer registered.
I've also been using ebay for 20 years. When people claim that ebay automatically sides with the buyer, I'm wondering if those same people had one bad experience and now claim it's the status quo.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I have a shop, so that might be the difference. Pay eBay every month, and you might get better service
I should not have to, but eBay has made it that way, waging outright war against small sellers the last few years. With onerous policy changes, increasing fees,and buyer butt-kissing, they have made it abundantly clear I am not welcome any longer. I joined eBay almost 19 years ago, in 1999, to sell some Battletech miniatures. I have always given excellent service, with 100% positive feedback from those 19 years. But I have made my last sale there. eBay wants big sellers paying them big fees, and who have the ability kiss every hurt buyer on the butt whether they are right or wrong, because they re big enough to take the hits. So be it.
And yes, I banned people. Mostly it was non payers and bid retractors. I allowed them to back out of their 'mistake' (which almost always wasn't, just them being stupid), but they were done ever bidding on my stuff. Today, it is not worth it. Buyers have become spoiled, and are holding all the cards on eBay. What eBay seems to forget these days is that there needs to be a balance between buyers and sellers. It is not there now, and has not been for sometime, and I don't see myself ever going back.
You don't have to, as in theory, and officially, there's no difference between having a store or not. Just like Yelp says there's no difference between paying them or not. It's just a coincidence shops that pay them have better feedback, and that feedback can change really quickly after you cut that first check. Pure coincidence. Absolutely *NOT* a shakedown. Criminally slanderous to even suggest it. And again zero proof. So there.
That said, I also have all my payments through PayPal, and buy all of my postage through eBay / PayPal as well...
It's interesting how we've gone from "sellers should be able to ban anyone who gives them honest feedback about a legitimate negative transaction" into talking about cases of buyers running illegal scams, as if the two have anything at all to do with each other. Nobody is disputing that buyers should not be able to commit fraud, just like sellers shouldn't be able to. But that has nothing to do with cases like the OP, where the seller failed to deliver the purchased product but is apparently entitled to avoid negative feedback because having people know about the failed transaction means the seller doesn't get the benefit of a perfect feedback score.
If I absolutely wanted to use that seller again (it's just one bad experience after all) I'd just create a new ebay account from an alternate email so that I could continue to use them.
Between my email, my work email, my wife's personal and work email, and our joint email account I could even do it several times if I had to.
cuda1179 wrote: If the Seller used "Random Shipping Company X" and the company looses the package, that's all on the seller, right?
I used Royal Mail Recorded, and have a tracking number that states it was delivered to the correct address and signed for by the buyer. Buyer says he never received it, Royal Mail are saying they delivered it. I suggested to the buyer that he checks with housemates and neighbours. eBay claim was opened and they sided with the buyer (and didn't reply to my messages).
I can vouch that the US Post Office does sometimes fudge on the signatures.
The local post office recently failed an inspection for that exact reason - many, many, many complaints. (Including two from me. One that was supposed to be signed for was listed as 'Left on Porch' - we didn't have a porch....)
The Auld Grump - a heck of a lot can come down to local staff - our local UPS staff is excellent - goes out of its way to provide service. Our local USPS was... not so excellent. (But has been doing better since the failed inspection)
My local USPS delivery person either can't read or doesn't care. I've had packages karate-chopped in half to wedge into the mailbox, packages thrown into melting snow banks, delivered to the wrong house (same house number) on several occasions, left under my houses gutter's downspout in a rainstorm, and left on the truck in "out for delivery status" for over a week. Many calls to the post office really have done nothing.
As a side note, I found this youtube video on how to protect yourself as a seller on ebay.
Inverse situation here - I’ve had so many packages from USPS I know my postlady’s name. I can also tell when she’s out for a day because the substitute drops our mail off on the wrong street (same house number, wrong street name).
UPS can’t even get it in the neighborhood on a good day. I’ve had to intercept it at the local office several times so it wouldn’t get lost.
I am an E-Bay buyer and seller. I sell simply to raise money for other things I want. The hobby has to partly pay for itself. I am not a business and my selling is not a regular thing
I am also quite happy to block awkward buyers as one buyer alone can totally devastate the ability for me to sell anything to anybody. Recently sold an item for 99p (Auction starting price) and happily shipped it the next day.Then had the buyer complaining about postage costs. The difference being just 4p on the actual postage costs. I did not charge for packaging which came to 56p.I had rude e-mails sent to me despite refunding on the first e-mail through PayPal. I politely e-mailed the seller explaining all they paid was the stamp price minus packaging. Then they got banned. Saves me dealing with a customer who could cause a lot of problems in the future.
In my 10 years of selling I have banned only 15 customers of which 12 are no longer registered E-Bay members.
Some E-bay buyers know they have all the cards stacked in their favour and will try it on as they know the seller will bend over backwards to save their credibility and ability to continue selling. E-Bay has made this mess. The only defence a seller has is the ability to block. But this unfortunately can only be done after the worse has happened .
I once placed an order for 20 Battle Games in Middle Earth Magazines (which are skinny so weight was hardly an issue). The seller advertised Combined Postage, and the postage was reasonable. I won all of the magazines at the starting bid price (£0.99) so I was expecting £20 plus roughly £5 for postage. I Requested a Total...
And the cheeky fether tried to charge me £30 for postage! (making what should have been £25 into a £60 purchase!) I questioned it and asked why he wasn't offering me Combined Postage like he promised in his listings. He told me that he did combine the postage, he gave me a "£5 discount" off the total cost of the 20 individual postage fees!
I told him in no uncertain terms that I wasn't going to pay it, asked him to cancel, and opened up an Ebay Dispute in response to his personal abuse and attempt to shame me into paying. We had a bit of back and forth, and he eventually admitted that he was unhappy that the Auctions sold at the initial price so decided to recoup what he hoped they would sell for by inflating the postage to reflect what he felt was a "fair price". And he insisted that I was still getting a good deal and I should be grateful.
I reiterated that I was not going to pay the artificially inflated postage, and demanded that he cancel the purchase. Eventually he agreed to do so, and he didn't seek to retaliate by leaving negative feedback so I refrained from leaving any feedback for him and asked Ebay to close the dispute case. I advised him to list his goods at what he feels is a fair price so the true price is reflected clearly and honestly in the listings so he doesn't have repeat incidents like this. A few days later he listed the magazines at £8 each.
Moral of the story is...always double check that a Seller understands the definition of Combined Postage.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I never do combined postage, never ship for free. Postage and handling are a cost, and I pass it on to the buyer. It's much cleaner all around
I don't expect Sellers to post for free. But I DO expect them to honour their promise to combine postage when posting multiple items together as one parcel when their Listings say that is what they will do. When a Seller combines items into one parcel, he makes a saving on postage versus packaging and posting all items individually. When they promise to "Combine Postage", that is a promise to pass on that saving on postage.
Have you seen a Battle Games in Middle Earth Magazine? They're thin. 20 of them is about the same thickness and weight as 5 present day White Dwarf magazines. Postage for a parcel of that size does not cost £30. It should have been about £5. £10 at most.
He wasn't passing on the true postage costs to me, he was artificially inflating it by insisting on charging an individual postage fee on each item, so he could pocket the different as profit when he bound them all together and posted it as one item, with one postage fee (according to weight). He outright admitted to me that he was doing it to recoup his perceived losses on 20 disappointing auctions.
The end result is that the 20 items were listed at a false price, and the true prices were hidden in postage artificially inflated after the caution.
Unless he specifically stated that he would only be charging actual postage, then any discount off full list is a combined discount. You should have requested estimated combined postage charge prior to bidding.
Typically the discount is half of the cheaper items, so you should have expected to pay roughly 20/35, not 5/35.
That is categorically not combined postage. That is discounted postage. Combined postage means physically combining the items together into one parcel and passing on the saving to the buyer. Every other Seller I have dealt with in my 10 years on Ebay has done it that way bar this one Seller. If a Seller does not know what the postage fee will be for one combined parcel, then there are online tools available to calculate the cost prior to posting so an accurate postage fee can be passed on to the buyer.
And again, for the third time, he outright admitted to me in PM's that he was doing it to inflate the total cost because he felt the items were worth more than 99 pence each.
Do you think that is honest and reasonable, to exploit postage to artificially hike the price to compensate for a disappointingly low winning bid? If a Seller is reluctant to sell Items at 99 pence each, then he should list them at what he feels is a fair price (in this sellers case, £8 each). Not hide the price in postage, and break a promise to combine postage.
Dude, it absolutely is. The combined postage discount can be as little as a penny, and it is 109% your fault for not getting a clear quote prior to bidding.
No it isn't. Thats discounting, not combining. These words are not interchangeable. And after that incident, I do check with Sellers that they correctly understand the definition. But every Seller I dealt with before him, and every seller I have dealt with since him, has understood that Combined Postage means combining items into ONE parcel and charging ONE fee. Its something that I thought didn't need clarifying.
Do you seriously believe the guy was going to post all 20 magazines individually, at £2.50 each? No, he was going to tape them all together and post it as one parcel at £5 (I've checked, thats how much Royal Mail charges), so he could pocket the other ~£30 as pure profit. Thats hardly honest or reasonable, its a disingenuous and manipulative way of hiding the true cost of items in postage.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I never do combined postage, never ship for free. Postage and handling are a cost, and I pass it on to the buyer. It's much cleaner all around
If I am buying multiple items from a seller and they refuse to combine the postage, it usually means they are using an inflated postage charge to make their item appear cheaper or they are simply price gouging me.
cuda1179 wrote: Long Story Short, A large ebay bits seller has banned me from buying their product because I gave them a valid negative review.
I have purchased dozens of bits orders from this seller over the years. Around Fathers Day ebay had a nice promotional code, combine this with this sellers "buy 10 things, get 10% off" policy and making a very large bits order was very cheap.
Unfortunately, for the first time ever, this seller let me down. After a rather unreasonable delay in shipping some bits were missing. Emails I sent were not returned, so I had to make a paypal claim. Eventually I got a refund, but this was still a negative experience in my book, and marked that one item as a negative on their feedback (with a dozen positives for the correct items). I am now banned from their ebay store.
Has anyone else had this kind of heavy-handed reaction to honest feedback?
Lets play devils advocate.
I am a bitz seller working out of the USA. I buy mostly Getting started sets and starter boxsets, I dont have a storefront yet so I have to buy retail but did a deal with a storefront for bulk. I split down the packages as I can. I sell most as sprue sets of getting started components and split down the rest for bitz. I boost tthe size of my bitz for sale collection by buying job lots of used sprues on ebay, I dont sell much of that just want a bigger storefront,
As is to be expected I make my most sales on marines.
Now two weeks ago someone wanted three plasmna guns and a powerfist. Later it turns out he only got two. Looking at the ordr its not likely to be yet another scammer, becaude this guy only missed a plasma gun and the large number of Tau I also sold him were all present. How did this happen? Maybe I dropped it while filling the envelope, I do so many mistakes can happen.
Anyway I have three jackass scammer cases on the boilright now, all cliaming they didnt receive their post to the same upmarket DesMoines zipcode. They are getting smarmy and spammy and ugly and as you know eBay always sides with the buyer. I had so many sales to do I forgot the request for the plasma gun and missed the rest this buyers messages because twoi arrived on Sunday and the scammers send about 10 emails each. It is just me on my lonesome.
So this dude who is missing his plasma gun goes to ebay for arbitration, feth, just refund it and deal with the three persistent scammers and 50 honest buyers I have on my plate today. But no he gives me a negative strike which hurt my business. gak this is my main income and I dont need this, its just me here working from my spare room upstairs.
As a rule I just ban those who give me negatives, mostly because there are some buyers who will do so as a matter of course. Feedback percentage is important, and people check up thye negatives never the positives. It can really hurt me and this feth fethed my rep over a $1 plasma gun. Best close him off in case it happens again.
Thats discounting, not combining. These words are not interchangeable. And after that incident, I do check with Sellers that they correctly understand the definition. But every Seller I dealt with before him, and every seller I have dealt with since him, has understood that Combined Postage means combining items into ONE parcel and charging ONE fee. Its something that I thought didn't need clarifying.
Evidently it does, because you don't understand what it means. There is no "definition" on eBay beyond offering a discount on the shipping cost, there's no specification beyond that.
Do you seriously believe the guy was going to post all 20 magazines individually, at £2.50 each? No, he was going to tape them all together and post it as one parcel at £5 (I've checked, thats how much Royal Mail charges), so he could pocket the other ~£30 as pure profit. Thats hardly honest or reasonable, its a disingenuous and manipulative way of hiding the true cost of items in postage.
But it was his right to choose to do so, as was your right to object. Although the reality is you made an assumption based on your own faulty thinking, failed to check in advance and subsequently ended up in that situation. If you'd enquired in advance you'd either have known not to bid or had proof of what he intended to charge.
cuda1179 wrote: Long Story Short, A large ebay bits seller has banned me from buying their product because I gave them a valid negative review.
I have purchased dozens of bits orders from this seller over the years. Around Fathers Day ebay had a nice promotional code, combine this with this sellers "buy 10 things, get 10% off" policy and making a very large bits order was very cheap.
Unfortunately, for the first time ever, this seller let me down. After a rather unreasonable delay in shipping some bits were missing. Emails I sent were not returned, so I had to make a paypal claim. Eventually I got a refund, but this was still a negative experience in my book, and marked that one item as a negative on their feedback (with a dozen positives for the correct items). I am now banned from their ebay store.
Has anyone else had this kind of heavy-handed reaction to honest feedback?
Lets play devils advocate.
I am a bitz seller working out of the USA. I buy mostly Getting started sets and starter boxsets, I dont have a storefront yet so I have to buy retail but did a deal with a storefront for bulk. I split down the packages as I can. I sell most as sprue sets of getting started components and split down the rest for bitz. I boost tthe size of my bitz for sale collection by buying job lots of used sprues on ebay, I dont sell much of that just want a bigger storefront,
As is to be expected I make my most sales on marines.
Now two weeks ago someone wanted three plasmna guns and a powerfist. Later it turns out he only got two. Looking at the ordr its not likely to be yet another scammer, becaude this guy only missed a plasma gun and the large number of Tau I also sold him were all present. How did this happen? Maybe I dropped it while filling the envelope, I do so many mistakes can happen.
Anyway I have three jackass scammer cases on the boilright now, all cliaming they didnt receive their post to the same upmarket DesMoines zipcode. They are getting smarmy and spammy and ugly and as you know eBay always sides with the buyer. I had so many sales to do I forgot the request for the plasma gun and missed the rest this buyers messages because twoi arrived on Sunday and the scammers send about 10 emails each. It is just me on my lonesome.
So this dude who is missing his plasma gun goes to ebay for arbitration, feth, just refund it and deal with the three persistent scammers and 50 honest buyers I have on my plate today. But no he gives me a negative strike which hurt my business. gak this is my main income and I dont need this, its just me here working from my spare room upstairs.
As a rule I just ban those who give me negatives, mostly because there are some buyers who will do so as a matter of course. Feedback percentage is important, and people check up thye negatives never the positives. It can really hurt me and this feth fethed my rep over a $1 plasma gun. Best close him off in case it happens again.
I feel your pain on bad customers. The bad ones make you look like a fool to some of the good ones, and it can get overwhelming at times. Been there, done that.
However, sometimes your problems are just that, YOUR problems. Yes, you've had a bad day or week. But the customer doesn't know this. From his perspective, all he knows is that he didn't receive his item, and you didn't respond. What are his options? File a grievance or eat the cost? As for his review, it's not dishonest.
In the end it is your choice to serve whoever you want.
cuda1179 wrote: Long Story Short, A large ebay bits seller has banned me from buying their product because I gave them a valid negative review.
I have purchased dozens of bits orders from this seller over the years. Around Fathers Day ebay had a nice promotional code, combine this with this sellers "buy 10 things, get 10% off" policy and making a very large bits order was very cheap.
Unfortunately, for the first time ever, this seller let me down. After a rather unreasonable delay in shipping some bits were missing. Emails I sent were not returned, so I had to make a paypal claim. Eventually I got a refund, but this was still a negative experience in my book, and marked that one item as a negative on their feedback (with a dozen positives for the correct items). I am now banned from their ebay store.
Has anyone else had this kind of heavy-handed reaction to honest feedback?
Lets play devils advocate.
I am a bitz seller working out of the USA. I buy mostly Getting started sets and starter boxsets, I dont have a storefront yet so I have to buy retail but did a deal with a storefront for bulk. I split down the packages as I can. I sell most as sprue sets of getting started components and split down the rest for bitz. I boost tthe size of my bitz for sale collection by buying job lots of used sprues on ebay, I dont sell much of that just want a bigger storefront,
As is to be expected I make my most sales on marines.
Now two weeks ago someone wanted three plasmna guns and a powerfist. Later it turns out he only got two. Looking at the ordr its not likely to be yet another scammer, becaude this guy only missed a plasma gun and the large number of Tau I also sold him were all present. How did this happen? Maybe I dropped it while filling the envelope, I do so many mistakes can happen.
Anyway I have three jackass scammer cases on the boilright now, all cliaming they didnt receive their post to the same upmarket DesMoines zipcode. They are getting smarmy and spammy and ugly and as you know eBay always sides with the buyer. I had so many sales to do I forgot the request for the plasma gun and missed the rest this buyers messages because twoi arrived on Sunday and the scammers send about 10 emails each. It is just me on my lonesome.
So this dude who is missing his plasma gun goes to ebay for arbitration, feth, just refund it and deal with the three persistent scammers and 50 honest buyers I have on my plate today. But no he gives me a negative strike which hurt my business. gak this is my main income and I dont need this, its just me here working from my spare room upstairs.
As a rule I just ban those who give me negatives, mostly because there are some buyers who will do so as a matter of course. Feedback percentage is important, and people check up thye negatives never the positives. It can really hurt me and this feth fethed my rep over a $1 plasma gun. Best close him off in case it happens again.
I feel your pain on bad customers. The bad ones make you look like a fool to some of the good ones, and it can get overwhelming at times. Been there, done that.
However, sometimes your problems are just that, YOUR problems. Yes, you've had a bad day or week. But the customer doesn't know this. From his perspective, all he knows is that he didn't receive his item, and you didn't respond. What are his options? File a grievance or eat the cost? As for his review, it's not dishonest.
In the end it is your choice to serve whoever you want.
Hypothetical story based on some sellers alleged experiences by the way.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I never do combined postage, never ship for free. Postage and handling are a cost, and I pass it on to the buyer. It's much cleaner all around
If I am buying multiple items from a seller and they refuse to combine the postage, it usually means they are using an inflated postage charge to make their item appear cheaper or they are simply price gouging me.
That's exactly what happened in my case. He outright admitted to me in dms that he felt the items I had won at auction for £1 each were worth at least £8.99 each, so he felt it was fair and reasonable to inflate the postage to compensate for the disappointing auctions.
When I refused to pay the inflated postage and asked him to.cancel, he followed my advice and relisted the items at the actual price that he wanted a couple days later.
Thats discounting, not combining. These words are not interchangeable. And after that incident, I do check with Sellers that they correctly understand the definition. But every Seller I dealt with before him, and every seller I have dealt with since him, has understood that Combined Postage means combining items into ONE parcel and charging ONE fee. Its something that I thought didn't need clarifying.
Evidently it does, because you don't understand what it means. There is no "definition" on eBay beyond offering a discount on the shipping cost, there's no specification beyond that.
Do you seriously believe the guy was going to post all 20 magazines individually, at £2.50 each? No, he was going to tape them all together and post it as one parcel at £5 (I've checked, thats how much Royal Mail charges), so he could pocket the other ~£30 as pure profit. Thats hardly honest or reasonable, its a disingenuous and manipulative way of hiding the true cost of items in postage.
But it was his right to choose to do so, as was your right to object. Although the reality is you made an assumption based on your own faulty thinking, failed to check in advance and subsequently ended up in that situation. If you'd enquired in advance you'd either have known not to bid or had proof of what he intended to charge.
I have been a member of Ebay for over 16 years, I can assure you that combined shipping and discount shipping mean *very* different things on E-bay, and by the definition of the words in the English language. You are free to have a different opinion but that does not make you right. On E-Bay the generally accepted meaning of combined shipping is to take all items eligible for it that you purchased in X amount of time from a seller (time is totally up to the seller) and to calculate shipping (to include packaging costs that may change due to needing a larger box) according to the group of products, rather than the cost of shipping them individually. Discounted shipping is when the seller will give you some percentage off their listed cost of shipping for the purchase of multiple items within X amount of time. This often ends up being similar to combined shipping in that the seller generally ships everything in one package but tends to provide a bit of extra profit to them as shipping one larger heavier box is virtually always cheaper than shipping a bunch of smaller lighter boxes. (Usually shipping discounts are offered for the time savings that occur from only having to ship to one person) Having said all of that, if the seller does not spell out *clearly* what the results of combined or discounted shipping is, you need to ask. After all you know what they say about assuming...
Generally speaking I would avoid any auction that does not clearly state how their shipping works. Whether it's a flat fee or calculated on locations with X amount built in for shipping if someone doesn't clearly lay it out you're just asking for trouble.
"Combined" literally means to take multiples and make them into one. There is no inherent implication of discount, it is, as you say, an accepted meaning. If you can find a specification in eBay's terms and conditions as to what consititutes combined shipping then by all means put it forward, but I (admittedly briefly) looked and could find no stipulation.
So ultimately we're still left with a situation that could have been avoided with some simple communication in advance rather than an assumption. eBay is littered with sellers charging odd shipping fees for various reasons, and I agree if it's not clearly spelled out in a listing then making assumptions is just asking to get bitten.
Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
I had an awkward buyer a few days ago. Demanding combined postage on two small items. Not usually a problem on high value items. But low value items it can be a different matter.
If I posted as singles they came to 79p each as large letters stamp price say 99p each with packaging materials. But combined postage and packed together as seller wanted pushed the order into a small parcel bracket and postage stamp price pushed up to £2.80. I contacted buyer to explain it would be cheaper to post as single items but the buyer obviously could not see why the postage jumped so high and still expected a refund on postage as the order was combined. Sorry buyer I have no control over Post office postage prices. Here in the UK postage priced go by weight and also thickness of the package to be sent.1mm too thick and it jumps to parcel status.
Often combining postage on items can come to more then posting as single items. No savings for the buyer and often I would of been better not listing at all. Often the buyer expects me the seller to swallow the extra cost for postage and often I do. I tend to sell low value items for play money. The items I sold were ancient aeromodeller magazines from the 40's and early 50's.
I do agree about E-Bay being littered with sellers with odd and silly inflated postage fees. If I want two or more items from a seller I always contact a seller first to see if they will combine postage and find out what the postage costs will be before bidding. It is common sense to do so. If they cannot tell me before the auction ends or If I don't agree with their postage prices and feel they are too high then I move on and buy from somebody else.
I've been on eBay for...maybe 15+ years, and while I benefit enough from using them, as a company they've been complete gak the past 5-7 years compared to previous. I do 90% selling and maybe 10% buying, and they definitely make it as hard as possible to defend yourself as a seller.
For this reason, and this reason only I absolutely understand sellers blocking buyers - even if a resolution was found on a previous item. The hassle is not worth the time, the time not being worth the money of that person's business.
If there was an alternative with equal presence on the market I'd be gone in a heartbeat. As such, I've learned to never sell anything expensive or valuable. I stick to things that won't bankrupt me etc. if things go south with an asshat. eBay is just playing the numbers. They know they benefit more financially from supporting buyers 100% and leaving sellers in the wind most of the time.
I basically plan on being screwed over by eBay once or twice a year.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
If I bid, I assume I'm paying full shipping on everything, and then I'll pay whatever it is when the bill comes. And if your auction said it had combined shipping, and you didn't give me any reasonable discount, I'll ask for one once the items are in my hands. And then, just as it's the seller's choice to decide on shipping charges, it's my choice as a buyer to decide what feedback to give. Go ahead and ban me afterwards. I don't want to accidentally bid again on somebody who doesn't reasonably combine shipping.
I only buy on ebay, never sell, but when i place a bid it is with full understanding that i am responsible for the shipping listed, I have no expectation of any type of bundling or any discounts. That said, I also find it potentially very dishonest to simply ban a buyer if the seller was in the wrong, IT makes me think fair or unfair that it is a shady seller. negative feedback is not a red flag for me unless it is what i would consider too risky, 1 or 2 out of 100 or so sales is not a problem and to be honest, I would be more comfortable with a seller who has some negatives as no one can please everyone all the time. Some buyers are very "FoS" and it shows in their complaints.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
If I bid, I assume I'm paying full shipping on everything, and then I'll pay whatever it is when the bill comes. And if your auction said it had combined shipping, and you didn't give me any reasonable discount, I'll ask for one once the items are in my hands. And then, just as it's the seller's choice to decide on shipping charges, it's my choice as a buyer to decide what feedback to give. Go ahead and ban me afterwards. I don't want to accidentally bid again on somebody who doesn't reasonably combine shipping.
I do believe that might be against eBay's terms of service. If the seller did everything by the book, they can dispute your negative feedback score.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
If I bid, I assume I'm paying full shipping on everything, and then I'll pay whatever it is when the bill comes. And if your auction said it had combined shipping, and you didn't give me any reasonable discount, I'll ask for one once the items are in my hands. And then, just as it's the seller's choice to decide on shipping charges, it's my choice as a buyer to decide what feedback to give. Go ahead and ban me afterwards. I don't want to accidentally bid again on somebody who doesn't reasonably combine shipping.
I do believe that might be against eBay's terms of service. If the seller did everything by the book, they can dispute your negative feedback score.
I think they used to have guidelines that you could charge postage plus a nominal fee for packing. Is this no longer the case?
JohnHwangDD wrote: Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
If I bid, I assume I'm paying full shipping on everything, and then I'll pay whatever it is when the bill comes. And if your auction said it had combined shipping, and you didn't give me any reasonable discount, I'll ask for one once the items are in my hands. And then, just as it's the seller's choice to decide on shipping charges, it's my choice as a buyer to decide what feedback to give. Go ahead and ban me afterwards. I don't want to accidentally bid again on somebody who doesn't reasonably combine shipping.
I do believe that might be against eBay's terms of service. If the seller did everything by the book, they can dispute your negative feedback score.
It's not against eBay's policies to ask a seller a question like, "why'd you charge me $20 shipping for a box that cost $5 to ship?" and it's not against the policies to leave negative feedback for anything you perceive to be negative. It's not extortion just to ask without any threat.
It is against eBay's policy to charge more than a reasonable shipping cost. I'd like to see a seller try to dispute feedback that just points out the seller didn't follow eBay's shipping policy.
Note: 99% of the sellers I've ever dealt with send an invoice with a decent shipping price without even asking, regardless of whether they mention any combined shipping policy. I don't mind paying somebody some money for supplies and the effort of packing things well. This almost never actually comes up.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
If I bid, I assume I'm paying full shipping on everything, and then I'll pay whatever it is when the bill comes. And if your auction said it had combined shipping, and you didn't give me any reasonable discount, I'll ask for one once the items are in my hands. And then, just as it's the seller's choice to decide on shipping charges, it's my choice as a buyer to decide what feedback to give. Go ahead and ban me afterwards. I don't want to accidentally bid again on somebody who doesn't reasonably combine shipping.
I do believe that might be against eBay's terms of service. If the seller did everything by the book, they can dispute your negative feedback score.
I think they used to have guidelines that you could charge postage plus a nominal fee for packing. Is this no longer the case?
It's not, because eBay now collects their fee on postage as well as product. It's the flip side of "free" shipping.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pink Horror wrote: It's not against eBay's policies to ask a seller a question like, "why'd you charge me $20 shipping for a box that cost $5 to ship?" and it's not against the policies to leave negative feedback for anything you perceive to be negative. It's not extortion just to ask without any threat.
It is against eBay's policy to charge more than a reasonable shipping cost. I'd like to see a seller try to dispute feedback that just points out the seller didn't follow eBay's shipping policy.
Note: 99% of the sellers I've ever dealt with send an invoice with a decent shipping price without even asking, regardless of whether they mention any combined shipping policy. I don't mind paying somebody some money for supplies and the effort of packing things well. This almost never actually comes up.
Combined shipping often ties to combined checkout. Ebay has a minimum fee that they charge per checkout so if you do 5 separate transactions, the seller has to pay the minimum 5x. For something cheap like bitz, that can be most of the money right there.
I'm back with another nail biter. I recently purchased a can of Citadel spray on eBay. Wrong color was sent, so I printed out the return label and shipped it back. Although I added the tracking number to the return system on eBay it is listed as unavailable. I can track it on USPS website but it's still not showing on eBay (3 day later). I hope the seller is honest if this needs to go to the resolution center,. As I some how doubt eBay personnel will log onto the USPS website to verify.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I never do combined postage, never ship for free. Postage and handling are a cost, and I pass it on to the buyer. It's much cleaner all around
So rather than one bigger cheaper postage(paid by buyer so not free) you would send 20 separate costing more for customer no difference to you?
Care to tell ebay selling nick so i can avoid you like plague?
JohnHwangDD wrote: Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
If I bid, I assume I'm paying full shipping on everything, and then I'll pay whatever it is when the bill comes. And if your auction said it had combined shipping, and you didn't give me any reasonable discount, I'll ask for one once the items are in my hands. And then, just as it's the seller's choice to decide on shipping charges, it's my choice as a buyer to decide what feedback to give. Go ahead and ban me afterwards. I don't want to accidentally bid again on somebody who doesn't reasonably combine shipping.
I do believe that might be against eBay's terms of service. If the seller did everything by the book, they can dispute your negative feedback score.
I think they used to have guidelines that you could charge postage plus a nominal fee for packing. Is this no longer the case?
It's not, because eBay now collects their fee on postage as well as product. It's the flip side of "free" shipping.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pink Horror wrote: It's not against eBay's policies to ask a seller a question like, "why'd you charge me $20 shipping for a box that cost $5 to ship?" and it's not against the policies to leave negative feedback for anything you perceive to be negative. It's not extortion just to ask without any threat.
It is against eBay's policy to charge more than a reasonable shipping cost. I'd like to see a seller try to dispute feedback that just points out the seller didn't follow eBay's shipping policy.
Note: 99% of the sellers I've ever dealt with send an invoice with a decent shipping price without even asking, regardless of whether they mention any combined shipping policy. I don't mind paying somebody some money for supplies and the effort of packing things well. This almost never actually comes up.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I never do combined postage, never ship for free. Postage and handling are a cost, and I pass it on to the buyer. It's much cleaner all around
So rather than one bigger cheaper postage(paid by buyer so not free) you would send 20 separate costing more for customer no difference to you?
Care to tell ebay selling nick so i can avoid you like plague?
You don't need it, as you clearly have a problem with his approach, so you'll pay close attention to the postage charges on anything you buy and therefore never bid on anything he's selling, right?
JohnHwangDD wrote: I never do combined postage, never ship for free. Postage and handling are a cost, and I pass it on to the buyer. It's much cleaner all around
So rather than one bigger cheaper postage(paid by buyer so not free) you would send 20 separate costing more for customer no difference to you?
Care to tell ebay selling nick so i can avoid you like plague?
If the buyer inflates my eBay admin and fees with 20 separate orders, they will pay what they pay.
Nope, how about you post your eBay buyer nick, so I can block you? Same with that super-entitled guy who backed out paying a fair price for the magazines; I want to preemptivcely block him so badly.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I never do combined postage, never ship for free. Postage and handling are a cost, and I pass it on to the buyer. It's much cleaner all around
So rather than one bigger cheaper postage(paid by buyer so not free) you would send 20 separate costing more for customer no difference to you?
Care to tell ebay selling nick so i can avoid you like plague?
If the buyer inflates my eBay admin and fees with 20 separate orders, they will pay what they pay.
Nope, how about you post your eBay buyer nick, so I can block you? Same with that super-entitled guy who backed out paying a fair price for the magazines; I want to preemptivcely block him so badly.
He paid fair price... what they sold for! The dick who sold them decided to rip him off on postage to make it up on the back end.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
If I bid, I assume I'm paying full shipping on everything, and then I'll pay whatever it is when the bill comes. And if your auction said it had combined shipping, and you didn't give me any reasonable discount, I'll ask for one once the items are in my hands. And then, just as it's the seller's choice to decide on shipping charges, it's my choice as a buyer to decide what feedback to give. Go ahead and ban me afterwards. I don't want to accidentally bid again on somebody who doesn't reasonably combine shipping.
I do believe that might be against eBay's terms of service. If the seller did everything by the book, they can dispute your negative feedback score.
I think they used to have guidelines that you could charge postage plus a nominal fee for packing. Is this no longer the case?
It's not, because eBay now collects their fee on postage as well as product. It's the flip side of "free" shipping.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pink Horror wrote: It's not against eBay's policies to ask a seller a question like, "why'd you charge me $20 shipping for a box that cost $5 to ship?" and it's not against the policies to leave negative feedback for anything you perceive to be negative. It's not extortion just to ask without any threat.
It is against eBay's policy to charge more than a reasonable shipping cost. I'd like to see a seller try to dispute feedback that just points out the seller didn't follow eBay's shipping policy.
Note: 99% of the sellers I've ever dealt with send an invoice with a decent shipping price without even asking, regardless of whether they mention any combined shipping policy. I don't mind paying somebody some money for supplies and the effort of packing things well. This almost never actually comes up.
Can YOU link to the policy on charging for shipping?
You really seem to be defending scummy sellers hard, man. "Haha, I 'combined' shipping, so now its $1000. Caveat emptor fethers!"
I didn't make the claim, so I don't have to. The onus is on the person who made the claim of some sort of policy, not the person who questioned it.
It's amusing that you call a seller "scummy" for merely following the contract specified in the auction. If you sign the paperwork to buy a car and then demand that they give you 100% of their spiffs and kickbacks and holdbacks, they'll tell you to go feth yourself. Same if you sign to buy a house at one rate, and then decide that you should pay less. Again they'll tell you to go feth yourself. Don't like the agreement after the fact? feth you, pay me. eBay is a contract, just like anything else. If the buyer is too stupid to understand what they are agreeing to, then they deserve to pay more.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
If I bid, I assume I'm paying full shipping on everything, and then I'll pay whatever it is when the bill comes. And if your auction said it had combined shipping, and you didn't give me any reasonable discount, I'll ask for one once the items are in my hands. And then, just as it's the seller's choice to decide on shipping charges, it's my choice as a buyer to decide what feedback to give. Go ahead and ban me afterwards. I don't want to accidentally bid again on somebody who doesn't reasonably combine shipping.
I do believe that might be against eBay's terms of service. If the seller did everything by the book, they can dispute your negative feedback score.
I think they used to have guidelines that you could charge postage plus a nominal fee for packing. Is this no longer the case?
It's not, because eBay now collects their fee on postage as well as product. It's the flip side of "free" shipping.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pink Horror wrote: It's not against eBay's policies to ask a seller a question like, "why'd you charge me $20 shipping for a box that cost $5 to ship?" and it's not against the policies to leave negative feedback for anything you perceive to be negative. It's not extortion just to ask without any threat.
It is against eBay's policy to charge more than a reasonable shipping cost. I'd like to see a seller try to dispute feedback that just points out the seller didn't follow eBay's shipping policy.
Note: 99% of the sellers I've ever dealt with send an invoice with a decent shipping price without even asking, regardless of whether they mention any combined shipping policy. I don't mind paying somebody some money for supplies and the effort of packing things well. This almost never actually comes up.
Can YOU link to the policy on charging for shipping?
You really seem to be defending scummy sellers hard, man. "Haha, I 'combined' shipping, so now its $1000. Caveat emptor fethers!"
Much like myself, I don't think John's argument has anything to do with scummy sellers and everything to do with idiotic buyers who make assumptions then cry when they're found to be faulty. Or even make fully informed decisions then leverage eBay's hopelessly biased resolution policies to get what they want, which is tantamount to blackmail.
Of course there's some bad faith sellers out there, but they're just a tiny fraction of the number of bad faith buyers who'll fairly shamelessly abuse the system to their advantage.
The anecdote that's promoted this tangent did indeed feature a bad faith seller who admitted as much after the fact, but it still remains that if the buyer had taken a little care and not made assumptions about something that eBay doesn't appear to have any regulation on, then the whole situation would have been avoided. So it's not so much caveat emptor as emptor doesn't make assumptions based on an unregulated term.
As an ebay seller who sells a lot of miniature wargaming stuff on ebay, let me give my fellow dakka members the perspective of a seller.
Buyer: I accidently bought this from you, but I didn't notice it was collection only.
Me: It was cleary marked COLLECTION ONLY!! in big fething letters. Obviously for customer service, I didn't say the second part or the fething bit, but that's what I was thinking
Buyer: Could you post it down instead?
Me: Happy to help, but it will cost a lot.
Buyer: That's a fething rip-off.
Me: It's a bulky item going from the top of Scotland to London. I don't set the postage rate, that's what the couriers charge, so that's what I'm charging you. Sorry about that.
Buyer: Could I have a refund instead.
Me: no problem, always happy to help. Here's a refund. (usually on the same day)
Buyer: I'll give him a negative rating.
Me: (thinking) you ungrateful sack of gak!!!!
I'm no saint, and I try my best, and my feedback score is very good, but sometimes you get customers like this, and you have to ban the fethers.
Azreal13 wrote: Much like myself, I don't think John's argument has anything to do with scummy sellers and everything to do with idiotic buyers who make assumptions then cry when they're found to be faulty.
Exactly. I lay things out pretty clearly in the listing, and it's not complicated. But I can't fix stupid.
I find that a completely honest feedback can be helpful.
If "I" mess up, a "normal" person should be grateful if a refund is given on a won bid, failing that, you pay up and learn from it.
Even if the supplier messed up but made good on the transaction, stating what went wrong and how the seller fixed it is a BETTER testament that they "make it right".
I am still sorting out my son getting a $50 Amazon card and then proceeded to "purchase" about $600 worth of stuff and a bunch of sellers were inquiring on when they would be paid... hard to explain the madness he created to an entitled 14 year old.
Avoiding ebay and Facebook until he has proven he understands that being a son-of-a-gun has consequences.
I mainly used ebay as a buyer and found the experience very good.
For "normal" transactions and people fishing for high-praise got me a bit miffed but the financial improvements for good ratings give good motivation.
It does make it clear to me to sort things out on the side and if they made you mad, then you might as well go big on the negative feedback, it does look like the route for blackmail buyers or incompetent sellers.
Hope everything works out either way for everyone here.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
If I bid, I assume I'm paying full shipping on everything, and then I'll pay whatever it is when the bill comes. And if your auction said it had combined shipping, and you didn't give me any reasonable discount, I'll ask for one once the items are in my hands. And then, just as it's the seller's choice to decide on shipping charges, it's my choice as a buyer to decide what feedback to give. Go ahead and ban me afterwards. I don't want to accidentally bid again on somebody who doesn't reasonably combine shipping.
I do believe that might be against eBay's terms of service. If the seller did everything by the book, they can dispute your negative feedback score.
I think they used to have guidelines that you could charge postage plus a nominal fee for packing. Is this no longer the case?
It's not, because eBay now collects their fee on postage as well as product. It's the flip side of "free" shipping.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pink Horror wrote: It's not against eBay's policies to ask a seller a question like, "why'd you charge me $20 shipping for a box that cost $5 to ship?" and it's not against the policies to leave negative feedback for anything you perceive to be negative. It's not extortion just to ask without any threat.
It is against eBay's policy to charge more than a reasonable shipping cost. I'd like to see a seller try to dispute feedback that just points out the seller didn't follow eBay's shipping policy.
Note: 99% of the sellers I've ever dealt with send an invoice with a decent shipping price without even asking, regardless of whether they mention any combined shipping policy. I don't mind paying somebody some money for supplies and the effort of packing things well. This almost never actually comes up.
Can YOU link to the policy on charging for shipping?
You really seem to be defending scummy sellers hard, man. "Haha, I 'combined' shipping, so now its $1000. Caveat emptor fethers!"
Much like myself, I don't think John's argument has anything to do with scummy sellers and everything to do with idiotic buyers who make assumptions then cry when they're found to be faulty. Or even make fully informed decisions then leverage eBay's hopelessly biased resolution policies to get what they want, which is tantamount to blackmail.
Of course there's some bad faith sellers out there, but they're just a tiny fraction of the number of bad faith buyers who'll fairly shamelessly abuse the system to their advantage.
The anecdote that's promoted this tangent did indeed feature a bad faith seller who admitted as much after the fact, but it still remains that if the buyer had taken a little care and not made assumptions about something that eBay doesn't appear to have any regulation on, then the whole situation would have been avoided. So it's not so much caveat emptor as emptor doesn't make assumptions based on an unregulated term.
So, since you follow "Air Bud" rules on a non-policy, you'd be OK with being charged $15 "combined" shipping on 2 items with a listed price of $5 shipping each? Combined doesn't mean cheaper after all! Gouge em for all they're worth!
There are times when high shipping costs on low value items are entirely justifiable.
Sand, sawdust, grain, gravel, hell even PVA glue, are peanuts to buy, but the sheer weight of these items in bulk makes for high shipping costs. Sometimes it's not conspiracy to rip-off the buyer.
Granted, there are some sellers who really do push it too far.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Nowhere does "combined shipping" specify how much discount needs to be passed back to the Buyer. You were of the 100% mistaken impression that the Seller would pass ALL of the savings back to you, when there was no obligation to do so. There was no agreement, so you should have been happy with whatever was offered. If you failed to get a shipping quote prior to bidding, that's entirely on you. One penny per item would have fulfilled the contract terms, and the Seller would have been completely within their rights to have strikes placed on your account for each and every item.
If I bid, I assume I'm paying full shipping on everything, and then I'll pay whatever it is when the bill comes. And if your auction said it had combined shipping, and you didn't give me any reasonable discount, I'll ask for one once the items are in my hands. And then, just as it's the seller's choice to decide on shipping charges, it's my choice as a buyer to decide what feedback to give. Go ahead and ban me afterwards. I don't want to accidentally bid again on somebody who doesn't reasonably combine shipping.
I do believe that might be against eBay's terms of service. If the seller did everything by the book, they can dispute your negative feedback score.
I think they used to have guidelines that you could charge postage plus a nominal fee for packing. Is this no longer the case?
It's not, because eBay now collects their fee on postage as well as product. It's the flip side of "free" shipping.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pink Horror wrote: It's not against eBay's policies to ask a seller a question like, "why'd you charge me $20 shipping for a box that cost $5 to ship?" and it's not against the policies to leave negative feedback for anything you perceive to be negative. It's not extortion just to ask without any threat.
It is against eBay's policy to charge more than a reasonable shipping cost. I'd like to see a seller try to dispute feedback that just points out the seller didn't follow eBay's shipping policy.
Note: 99% of the sellers I've ever dealt with send an invoice with a decent shipping price without even asking, regardless of whether they mention any combined shipping policy. I don't mind paying somebody some money for supplies and the effort of packing things well. This almost never actually comes up.
Can YOU link to the policy on charging for shipping?
You really seem to be defending scummy sellers hard, man. "Haha, I 'combined' shipping, so now its $1000. Caveat emptor fethers!"
Much like myself, I don't think John's argument has anything to do with scummy sellers and everything to do with idiotic buyers who make assumptions then cry when they're found to be faulty. Or even make fully informed decisions then leverage eBay's hopelessly biased resolution policies to get what they want, which is tantamount to blackmail.
Of course there's some bad faith sellers out there, but they're just a tiny fraction of the number of bad faith buyers who'll fairly shamelessly abuse the system to their advantage.
The anecdote that's promoted this tangent did indeed feature a bad faith seller who admitted as much after the fact, but it still remains that if the buyer had taken a little care and not made assumptions about something that eBay doesn't appear to have any regulation on, then the whole situation would have been avoided. So it's not so much caveat emptor as emptor doesn't make assumptions based on an unregulated term.
So, since you follow "Air Bud" rules on a non-policy, you'd be OK with being charged $15 "combined" shipping on 2 items with a listed price of $5 shipping each? Combined doesn't mean cheaper after all! Gouge em for all they're worth!
This isn't about gouging, this is about buyers making assumptions. If, as already illustrated, shipping two combined items somehow generated higher shipping fees, and the buyer hadn't already established a price for both beforehand, then yes, it's fair.
But that's based on your slightly spurious example, the real argument here is about people making assumptions on how much discount combined shipping actually entails, when nobody has actually been able to produce any evidence that eBay has any official policy, or even guidelines, to define it. Not that combined shipping is generally accepted in eBay land to mean lower cost shipping. Even the slightly dodgy activity of the seller in the original example offered some discount, the issue was it wasn't what the buyer expected and the fault is with him for not establishing it in advance when it wasn't clearly explained in the listing.
This thread has really made me realize that Ebay is at best going to stay where it is growth wise and at worst eventually fail and go away. No one has a positive mindset about it. Serious sellers like John are in full on "Screw you all" mode about even the possibility of a buyer leaving a bad review and the lack of any way to deal with that short of banning. And buyers are quickly being taught that they have to read the fine print or risk being screwed. The entire situation is on a negative trajectory.
eBay has been on a decline for a while, due to Amazon making buying simple and easy. The only reason I'm on it is because I have a long feedback trail to leverage, rather than starting over on Amazon. I try to be fair and responsible, follow the rules. But at this point, the fine print is absolutely necessary to protect myself. So no, I'm not particularly sympathetic when people can't get basic stuff straight.
Ebay and sites like this are the only places i can get some of the game minis for games I play that are OOP, I will put up with a reasonable amount of gak to buy what I want, in the end its an "auction" so I can decide how much I want to bid and not have to go any further. For "buy it now" I can make the decision if its worth it to me or not. I would be fine buying from someone like JD, since I knwo what i am looking for and what its worth to me.
The message I'm taking from this thread is that I need to message each and every EBay seller before placing a bid to ask "Are youa liar that's going to rip me off?"
As for "Reading the Fine Print", I DID. the seller promised in every listing that he would combine postage. And then he did not combine postage.I refused to pay the inflated postage, he eventually agreed to cancel and relisted them at the true price (£8.99 not £0.99) and we went our seperate ways without leaving any feedback for each other.
How do you explain that JohnHwangHD? All I've seen you do is victim blame me. Not once have I seen you acknowledge that...
A) he confessed to me in Dms that he was deliberately inflating the postage because the auctions were disappointingly low
B) He relisted the items at a higher price (~£8.99) instead of £0.99.
Hell, if he had just listed the items at that true price, and not tried to rip me off with inflated postage I probably would have still bought from him, because he was the only seller selling the items I wanted at the time.
I know that there is no official regulation on what the definition of combined postage is (there should be) but there most definitely is an unoffical convention among Sellers. By the time I dealt with this seller, and ever since him, EVERY one of the 3 dozen or so sellers I've ever dealt with on EBay have followed the same understanding of combined postage, that you combine the items into one package and only charge the postage fee for that one single package.
Based on my personal experience prior to this seller, I had no reason to ever suspect that the postage conditions that he listed might be a lie.
And I've had no problems since him regarding postage.
Anyway, regarding the OP. I'd have no problem whatsoever if the Seller banned me after this experience, I think that's just common sense after a negative experience like this, both parties should go their separate ways. He'd be doing us both a favour, I wouldn't want to accidentally buy from him again.
What you've still, somehow, failed to understand is that
A) While he did admit he'd tried to recoup money through shipping, he'd still fulfilled the terms of combined shipping by knocking a fiver off the total. Nobody has managed to offer any proof that "combined shipping" has some sort of definition on eBay beyond "you pay less total shipping than if you'd bought each item individually."
B) Nobody is arguing that he didn't try and rip you off. Merely that if the listings weren't explicit on what "combined shipping" consisted of, that you making assumptions about what it would be is kind of on you. He fulfilled the strict definition of combined shipping, if not the spirit, and it differed from your assumption. He didn't break any rules, he just didn't act according to your expectations.
There's no question what he did was cheeky, but if you'd taken the time to message rather than assume, you'd have never ended up in the situation, as either he'd have made you a reasonable quote not knowing the items would under sell, and have to stick to it, or you'd have gotten a warning and never bid.
So, yes, you should message each and every eBay seller you're buying multiple items from to clarify the shipping if it isn't explicit in the listing, or you're just asking for the same thing to happen again.
if a high feedback score is better for you, if you screw up my order that's a negative experience and you should expect to be rated honestly on it. I have zero obligation to let it go and pretend that everything was just fine so that you don't have to take a penalty for your failure.
Personally, I hold sellers with an Ebay shop to a higher standard - if you're running it like a business, then I'll treat you like one - no late dispatch because you were ill or on holiday or whatever. If it's a private individual, then I'll accept such delays as long as it's stated up front and communicated to me; If the listing says "all items dispatched on the following Tuesday" or whatever, fine. If I buy an item from some fellow and then get a message, "I'm sorry, but I won't get this posted until the end of the week as my child's ill", again OK. If I buy something, it doesn't turn up a week after the advertised date, and when I complain I then get the sick child story, not fine. If I order from "We Sell Bits!" and it's delayed for any reason, not OK.
