EBAY SHOULDNT FUND CRIMINALS !! UNFAIR DECISION OF PAYMENT DISPUTE CASE

[wilsonsim91]

I sold this watch on ebay for AUD$5000 3 months ago. 
Now, the buyer had lodge a dispute and the case was closed in their favor. 

The reason for the dispute is that they had not authorized the transaction.

However, this isn't true as the buyer was even chatting with me asking me to send it on express. 

Photo evidence below: 

So lets assume that a hacker got into the person's account and chat with me and made the transaction, then dispute it 3 months later. The hacker would have the watch and would not return it and whats worst , ebay deducts money from my end to refund it too. THAT MEANS THAT I HAVE JUST BEEN ROBBED TWICE. 

What's going to happen now? I am just going to be robbed $10,000 out of my pocket like this? 

There wasn't even an assurance that i will get my goods back. 

Whats worst, i try to call ebay centre and routes me to chat. 
At the chat, i was referred to indian offshore support team through 4 people whom had to refer to "specialist"  but there wasn't a specialist at the end either. 

THIS IS RUBBISH! 👎🏻

EBAY IF YOU DONT INTEVENE, I WOULD HAVE TO BRING IT TO COURT. 

[jellybirddesigns]

I believe you should have been covered by the sellers guarantee - that you shipped it within your handling time and with tracking to the address provided at checkout.

HOWEVER, items over $750 in value are supposed to get a signature on delivery.

Did you get this?

Unfortunately, scammers are everywhere - never sell something you cannot afford to lose.

[wilsonsim91]

Thanks for the feedback. 

Ill have a look at sellers guarantee, I did ship it within my handling time with tracking as well. 
Signature on delivery, i couldn't because it was a parcel locker. 

I should have been aware with selling to members with 0 feedback and a parcel locker nextime. 

[kopenhagen5]

No, you haven't been robbed twice, you are out of pocket the watch, value 5000.

Contact the online cybercrime unit. https://www.cyber.gov.au/acsc/report

Also PayPal if they paid that way, they often chase up fraudulent claims.

[papermoon.lady]

He said that the hacker has the watch AND that eBay took money out of his account to refund the buyer who had not authorized the transaction (the hacker had apparently used the buyer's account to pay).

He should definitely contact the online cybercrime unit... No idea how they could do this. I thought PP verified identities, so hackers wouldn't be able to do this, but maybe the hacker used another payment method. Or maybe the scammer is actually the buyer after all (0 fb and a parcel locker as address).

[kopenhagen5]

That would be my guess, the buyer worked out a way to get a cheap expensive watch.

[papermoon.lady]

A watch and a refund... 😞

[davewil1964]

Yes. But the OP is out the watch. $5,000 (value) plus fees. Not $10k. If the buyer hadn't been refunded, the OP would have the $5k, less fees. So the OP is not out $10k.

Double entry accounting doesn't work that way, nor does real life.

Highly unlikely to be a hacker, much more likely to be an online shoplifter. Hackers don't tend to hack 0 feedback accounts; they don't need to. They can open their own and have the item delivered to them and then instigate a chargeback. Which is what appears to have happened here. Which is not hacking.

[papermoon.lady]

I know, I was just pointing out that there might not be two persons (a hacker who has the watch and a buyer who has the refund), and I actually don't think there are two persons either, as I agree that hackers don't hack new accounts with 0 feedback. The seller had originally been paid (the so-called unauthorized transaction), so obviously he has not lost $10,000, although 5,000 is also a considerable amount...

It would be interesting to see if the messages to the seller prior to shipping and the dispute were started from the same IP, although the buyer/scammer could have used different computers or a proxy, but just in case he didn't think about it...