NEGATIVE feedback option for time wasting non paying bidders to be exposed?

[gsd76_2008]

It is high time that ebay reintroduce feedback options for SELLERS, other than positive - so that time wasting NON PAYING BIDDERS can be exposed!!   Any other sellers agree?....

[kobies_costume_jewelry]

If they can issue a strike they can issue a fine.

It's their site they should be doing the policing not the seller's who E'bay rely on to report policy violation's

How would I take them to court I live in SA and E'bay follow's NSW laws so wouldn't I have to go to NSW to make a claim?

Court's are not the only people who can issue fine's and penalties for non performance etc. Footballer's get fined don't they?

So what if E'bay has to go through the same proceedure as you or I, maybe they might do something about this issue.

Block's dont work people are obviously still geting through.

I didnt even know about non paying bidder's until we started selling nor how rife it is.

Yet it happens continues to happen and E'bay do what? 

From the user agreement.

Using eBay

While using the eBay services, you will not:

fail to deliver payment for items purchased by you, unless the seller has materially changed the item's description after you bid, a clear typographical error is made, or you cannot authenticate the seller's identity 

So they have breached their contract with E'bay by not paying. Fine them for that breach.

$1 fine payable to E'bay with their account suspended until they pay.

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@tuffy42tuffy wrote:

eBay need to address the problem of non-paying buyers who seem to be a protected species these days. End of story. A buyers history needs to be transparent just as the sellers history. NPB's can obviously be blocked and UPI's registered but this doesn't deter frivolous "buyers". . Seems to me that SELLERS are the ones who list an item for sale at a cost and are the ones who are being penalised. And please,let's not go back to the era when rogue sellers left unfair feedback....the wheel has turned full circle. Non-paying buyers should have a visual mark on their history.

Having stated all that...eBay will do nothing about the problem...isn't that obvious?.

---

The actions that eBay can take are very limited. There is this little thing called the law.

eBay are not a party to any contract formed between a buyer and seller, and thus the law says they have no avenue to take any action pertaining to that transaction.

It is up to the two trading parties to seek resolution.

When a person makes the committment to buy something from another, the contract is formed between those two parties. The law says that only those two parties can take action on that contract.

In the case of transactions, eBay are nothing more than the park bench where you met a trading partner to do a deal.

[thecatspjs]

---

@kobies_costume_jewelry wrote:

If they can issue a strike they can issue a fine.

It's their site they should be doing the policing not the seller's who E'bay rely on to report policy violation's

How would I take them to court I live in SA and E'bay follow's NSW laws so wouldn't I have to go to NSW to make a claim?

Court's are not the only people who can issue fine's and penalties for non performance etc. Footballer's get fined don't they?

So what if E'bay has to go through the same proceedure as you or I, maybe they might do something about this issue.

Block's dont work people are obviously still geting through.

I didnt even know about non paying bidder's until we started selling nor how rife it is.

Yet it happens continues to happen and E'bay do what? 

From the user agreement.

Using eBay

While using the eBay services, you will not:

fail to deliver payment for items purchased by you, unless the seller has materially changed the item's description after you bid, a clear typographical error is made, or you cannot authenticate the seller's identity 

So they have breached their contract with E'bay by not paying. Fine them for that breach.

$1 fine payable to E'bay with their account suspended until they pay.

---

I don't agree with a fine where eBay rakes in the proceeds. 

But I sure do agree that a penalty system could be implemented in a range of ways with the proceeds going to the seller that has experienced the non-payment as compensation   

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@kobies_costume_jewelry wrote:

If they can issue a strike they can issue a fine. No, they can't.

It's their site they should be doing the policing not the seller's who E'bay rely on to report policy violation's

eBay are nothing more than a coffee shop which provides people a place to meet.

How would I take them to court I live in SA and E'bay follow's NSW laws so wouldn't I have to go to NSW to make a claim?

No. eBay follows NSW law as that is their registered Australian "home", so their jurisdiction.. So only the contract between you and eBay is to be enforced through NSW laws. (Which I believe are the same as Commonwealth Laws, but I don't know, have never studied NSW law in any depth) Your contract with them has nothing to do with your contract with a trading partner, they are two separate contracts.

1) The contract that you sign with eBay when you join their site and agree to their terms and conditions.

2) The contracts between a buyer and a seller in the process of trade.

The seller would commence proceedings in their own jurisdiction.

Court's are not the only people who can issue fine's and penalties for non performance etc. Footballer's get fined don't they?

 I am not privvy to what klinds of contracts they form, who issues the fines or under what authority. But they are fined through the legal system, which their contracting party would initiate for breach of contract.

So what if E'bay has to go through the same proceedure as you or I, maybe they might do something about this issue.

A legal proceding to fine somoen $1? They and their legal teram would be fined (if not disbarred) for wasting Court Time. Plus the costs that would be incurred to enforce the contract between eBay and the party would be phenomenal.

eBay have chosen not to pursue that avenue (for obvious reasons) and instead provide users with legal avenues to assist the parties with online trading. I think that people believe that eBay are their mothers. eBay owes you no p[rotection from business transactions. That is up to the individual people. What they provide are free tools to assist people, but they acn't force them to use them. This is provided as a courtesy (and as some form of damage control to protect their brand name and business)

Block's dont work people are obviously still geting through.

because sellers are not using the systems in place. The only people getting through should be firt time non payers, and no system can predict which members will be the non payers before they breach. And remember that Australian Law is a party to the Presumption of Innocence.

I didnt even know about non paying bidder's until we started selling nor how rife it is.

Use the processes in place.

There are non paying people in business everywhere, not just eBay.

Yet it happens continues to happen and E'bay do what? 

They are doing what they can within the boiundaRIES of the law and with consideration of financial viability.

From the user agreement.

Using eBay

While using the eBay services, you will not:

fail to deliver payment for items purchased by you, unless the seller has materially changed the item's description after you bid, a clear typographical error is made, or you cannot authenticate the seller's identity 

So they have breached their contract with E'bay by not paying. Fine them for that breach.

$1 fine payable to E'bay with their account suspended until they pay.

---

eBay cannot enforce the fine. They have to get a court to enforce the penalty.

even if you have a contract with someone in the real world. You cannot impose penalty on them and take the law into your own hands, even if it is written in the contract. You have to go to court to get the court to impose the penalty.

As strange as this sounds, It has to be proven that a breach of contract has occurred.

eBay can't just take your word for it that someone didn't pay you.

You have to go through the process to show proof that they didn't pay.

That contract has to be concluded before eBay's contract can come into play, So if a seller does not go through the unpaid item process, eBay don't even have any proof.

Then, if they have that proof of that, they have to take them to court to have the contract enforced. otherwise they have nothing but unfounded allegations.

This entire process would be cost and time prohibitive, especially when the aim is to recoup $1.

If you read those same T&C, eBay does not guarantee you any protection during your trading.

And they get to choose if and when they wish to enforce the contract if someone breaches their contract, just like you do. But there is nothing saying they have to, they owe you nothing. So they get to decide if it is worth their while.

What they have done is implement systems to reduce the liklihood opf the occurance and minimize the risk.

They can't just round up all their non payers once a week and herd them off to court collectively. Each person is an individual court case with an individual contract which must be proven to be in breach.

 The Commonwealth would need a court just for eBay claims (who's going to pay for that and would one be enough?) if they ran to court with every non payer to get $1.

It's just not financially viable and I can't see it becomeing financially viable until such time as someone is a very bad serial non payer, if then.

Non Payers and contract breaches are in every aspect of our lives.

Did you know that each time you are 1 day late paying a bill you are in breach of contract?

Each time you don't follow through on a lay buy or an item you ask to put on hold?

When your child is late for school or you to an appointment. (ever missed a doctor's appointment?)

Some contracts are worth having enforced, most just aren't financially or otherwise viable.

[gec2002]

On the US site eBay are altering how they handle handle Buy It Now and Best Offer transactions and won't consider items "sold" until the buyer actually pays.  They also changed being able to open an unpaid item case after two days. eBay states " eligible listings will remain active until a buyer submits payment; the item will only be considered sold when the buyer pays for the item."

This would really help, its not the non-payment by itself that is a pain its that 8 days stock is tied up which directly impacts on cashflow.  The sooner its introduced here the better.  I understand only the reduction in waiting time helps auctions but it would be a start.

At the end of the day eBay is about the only online marketplace where users can buy a fixed-price item without paying for it on the spot.   Items in carts not paid for, can become unavailable if others buy and pay straight away , so the concept is not unknown to alot of buyers.

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@kobies_costume_jewelry wrote:

If they can issue a strike they can issue a fine.

It's their site they should be doing the policing not the seller's who E'bay rely on to report policy violation's

How would I take them to court I live in SA and E'bay follow's NSW laws so wouldn't I have to go to NSW to make a claim?

Court's are not the only people who can issue fine's and penalties for non performance etc. Footballer's get fined don't they?

So what if E'bay has to go through the same proceedure as you or I, maybe they might do something about this issue.

Block's dont work people are obviously still geting through.

I didnt even know about non paying bidder's until we started selling nor how rife it is.

Yet it happens continues to happen and E'bay do what? 

From the user agreement.

Using eBay

While using the eBay services, you will not:

fail to deliver payment for items purchased by you, unless the seller has materially changed the item's description after you bid, a clear typographical error is made, or you cannot authenticate the seller's identity 

So they have breached their contract with E'bay by not paying. Fine them for that breach.

$1 fine payable to E'bay with their account suspended until they pay.

---

also note in there, that eBay have not given a timeframe in which the person has to pay.

I don' think that consumer law would allow them to either, as they cannot impose terms and conditions on a contract to which they are not a party.

So it is the seller that needs to show that their contract has been breached. Then they take that to eBay, and from there eBay and their legals who can decide the viability of taking action.

You cannot blame eBay because they follow the law.

You cannot blame eBay because a seller does not take steps to enforce their contract.

.........................

OK lets pretend that eBay could just enforce that clause at the drop of a hat with no repercussions and fine people $1 or even bloack them from trading.

It's a very lengthy process to go through once people default on a bill or loan etc.

It takes months if not years, of letters of demand and whatever other processes people have to go through to recover funds and implement penalties.

Then it's not just the length of time, but the money this time costs to prepare for and follow the processes in place.

Would you go through this process for $1?

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@gec2002 wrote:

On the US site eBay are altering how they handle handle Buy It Now and Best Offer transactions and won't consider items "sold" until the buyer actually pays.  They also changed being able to open an unpaid item case after two days. eBay states " eligible listings will remain active until a buyer submits payment; the item will only be considered sold when the buyer pays for the item."

That works. We can already do that here with automatic payment required for BIN's. I don't think that auctions could "be eligible" though, simply because a person does not need to be there at the time the contract is formed. other reasons too, but they require an understanding of both the auction and contract formation processes, so too hard to explain.

This would really help, its not the non-payment by itself that is a pain its that 8 days stock is tied up which directly impacts on cashflow.  The sooner its introduced here the better.  I understand only the reduction in waiting time helps auctions but it would be a start.

8 days is nothing compared to the length of time that it would take through other legal channels if ebay did not offer this form of arbitration as a courtesy to users.

But it is already here - the instant payment required. A seller just needs to list in the correct format (BIN) and tick the little box.

At the end of the day eBay is about the only online marketplace where users can buy a fixed-price item without paying for it on the spot.   Items in carts not paid for, can become unavailable if others buy and pay straight away , so the concept is not unknown to alot of buyers.

---

eBay cannot interfere with the trading terms of a contract to which they are not a party. They cannot force somebody to honour a contract, especially one to which they have nothing to do with. That's the law.

Those "other websites" that require instant payment. Between which two parties are the contracts formed?

ie is it like Myer website where they are the actual seller, or another site like eBay where there are hundreds of different sellers who are not the host of the website?

......................................................................

Asking eBay to enforce a contract between a buyer and a seller is like a shop owner asking Westfields to make a customer of the shop owner to pay them. Can you kind of see how ludicrous that is?

That is up to the seller to initiate, and ebay have already provided those tools to enable them to do that.

[gec2002]

8 days is nothing compared to the length of time that it would take through other legal channels if ebay did not offer this form of arbitration as a courtesy to users.  So what has that got to do with it, they do offer it and can easily reduce it.  What would happen if it wasn't in place has nothing to do with it.

eBay cannot interfere with the trading terms of a contract to which they are not a party. They cannot force somebody to honour a contract, especially one to which they have nothing to do with. That's the law.

Those "other websites" that require instant payment. Between which two parties are the contracts formed?
 

As you said before "But it is already here - the instant payment required. A seller just needs to list in the correct format (BIN) and tick the little box."  if they can implement it as an option why can't they introduce it fully.?

They (eBay) are doing what they can within the boiundaRIES of the law and with consideration of financial viability. Yes but only until someone comes up with a better way of doing it.  Its called progress.  I know it great to flaunt your legal knowledge with list of reasons why eBay won't or can't do something, along with legal reasons to back your arguments but how does that help the site and the average seller to move forward.   Perhaps just for a change why don't you come up with some ideas how the problem might be solved.  I know most ideas won't be implemented by eBay for one reason or another but just maybe one will actually catch on and work and make the life of sellers a bit easier.

[*crikey*mate*]

I need to clarify something with regards to jurisdiction of what law applies when a claim is made for a contract to be enforced.

The case Brinkibon Ltd v Stahag Stahl [1983] 2 AC 34 establishes that for methods of instantaneous communication acceptance occurs at the location from which it was communicated.

This is why the law of the seller's jurisdiction applies in a buyer/seller relationship on eBay.

As it is they that accepts the offer. (Acceptance is communicated by the fall of the hammer/end of the auction/BIN)

For our contract with ebay.

The advertisement to join is an an invitation to treat,

By submitting the application form and agreeing to the terms and conditions, this is the offer.

Acceptance occurs when it is communicated when ebay says "congratulations, start buyiong" (sic)

hence, as ebay's registered Australian Home is in NSW, this is where acceptance occurred, so NSW laws apply. (unless commonwealth laws overrule)

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@gec2002 wrote:

Me: 8 days is nothing compared to the length of time that it would take through other legal channels if ebay did not offer this form of arbitration as a courtesy to users.  So what has that got to do with it, they do offer it and can easily reduce it.  What would happen if it wasn't in place has nothing to do with it.

Me: ok sorry, I must have misunderstood. Maybe they can't reduce it? (I don't know, but there is a reason why in the US it is 2 days for initiation but still 4 days for closure - so maybe our consumer laws stop them from making it a shorter time? as I said, I don't know, but that descrepancy leads me to believe that it is some law preventing it)

.........................................................................................................................

Me:eBay cannot interfere with the trading terms of a contract to which they are not a party. They cannot force somebody to honour a contract, especially one to which they have nothing to do with. That's the law.

Those "other websites" that require instant payment. Between which two parties are the contracts formed?
 

As you said before "But it is already here - the instant payment required. A seller just needs to list in the correct format (BIN) and tick the little box."  if they can implement it as an option why can't they introduce it fully.?

Me Because it is the seller's choice to make that a term of the contract. eBay can not impose terms of a contrtact to which they are not a party.

What do you mean by fully?

....................................................................................................................

Me They (eBay) are doing what they can within the boiundaRIES of the law and with consideration of financial viability. Yes but only until someone comes up with a better way of doing it.  Its called progress.  I know it great to flaunt your legal knowledge with list of reasons why eBay won't or can't do something, along with legal reasons to back your arguments but how does that help the site and the average seller to move forward.   Perhaps just for a change why don't you come up with some ideas how the problem might be solved.  I know most ideas won't be implemented by eBay for one reason or another but just maybe one will actually catch on and work and make the life of sellers a bit easier.

The problem will be solved when the law changes, and I don't think that either you, me or eBay are that powerful. So, any discussion to implement a new "idea" is pure fantasy unless a person knows what is and isn't realistically possible.

I was just trying to explain why things are as they are.

If people understand that, and understand the laws surrounding trade, then realistic ideas can be contemplated.

How many people would you like to have discussing unrealistic ideas of pure fantasy? You don't want at least one voice in the crowd pointing out why or why not that option may or may not be viable?

Isn't that what a discussion involves? 2 different views? or would you prefer it if everyone just said "WOW! what a great idea! and prolong unrealistic fantasy when discussion could be moving on to ideas that may be realistic.

If that's all yopu want, then nothing will ever change, even if it could.

I'm sorry if my use of the law offends you, but we are talking about trading practises, so the law is pretty much in our faces. and acceptance of those laws and an understanding of why things are as they are, might just help people to "move forward" into a direction where progress can occur. But progress can only happen within the boundaries of the law.

If you want fantasy, there are different websites for that. (just make sure your sopyware and virus protection are up to date before visiting them)

The whole reason I went to law school was to learn why things are as they are, to understand how the law works. When we understand how and why the law works as it does, then we can find ways to "move forward"

---