I bought a complete kitchen on eBay. It was expensive. I then spent a day organising people to help me dismantle it, transport it and reassemble it. I entered into a contract to sell it and install it. I spent hours measuring and planning. The seller then cancelled and refunded. I am several thousand dollars out of pocket. EBay said that because I got a refund - maybe I did, but it seems likely to take five days or so to happen - I have no rights. Ebay threatens buyers that they are entering into a contract that they must honour. There is no means of contacting them except by chat because the 'purchase was refunded'. Ebay's chat doesn't work - the minutes count down then when it gets to 1 minute it freezes. There is not even an email address to record disappointment. Be aware that when you purchase on eBay you are on your own. There is no redress other than refund. In any legitimate market the law of contract would allow redress through the courts. eBay is designed to ensure that can never happen. Draw your own conclusions, but beware.
Well, there's definitely something going on with the sellers account as there is a second negative left, that the transaction was also cancelled. I think that the seller received a higher offer on both items, the kitchen and the gas fireplace, and that's why they cancelled. It's the sellers right to get the best price for his items, even if that means 2 negatives on their account which they obviously do not care about.
I should just add, that you seem very keen on the idea of legal redress through the courts, but what, exactly would you take the seller to court for? Inconvenience? A judge would laugh at you, especially as you were refunded.
Nobody here needs to "draw our own conclusions". Most of us have been on this platform for years (decades even), and understand how Ebay works. We know that if a seller cancels, it's just tough luck and that even if Ebay states you are "entering into a contract", they have zero way of enforcing anything on buyers and sellers who may live several states away, or even in different countries. Most disputes wouldn't even be worth taking to the Small Claims Court due to the time and expense required.
I'm reiterating what repentatleisure has said with regard to enforcing the contract.
eBay explicitly state that they don't enforce the contract. Quoting from eBay's User Agreement:
❝When you enter into a transaction you create a legally binding contract with another user, unless the item is listed in a category under the Non-binding bid policy. You must ensure that you comply with your obligations to that other member and are aware of any laws relevant to you as a buyer or seller. If another member breaches any obligation to you, you – not eBay – are responsible for enforcing any rights that you may have.❞
eBay simultaneously make it clear that a buyer and a seller are entering into a legally binding contract and that the buyer must pay and the seller must send/make available the item, while also making it possible for sellers to cancel a sale or the buyer to request a cancellation*. This instills the idea in some eBayers that the sale isn't final, that there's wriggle room.
* The buyer can't cancel, but he/she can decline to pay. That might end up with them receiving a Non-Paying Bidder/Buyer strike, but the extent to which it stops non-payment when a buyer simply doesn't want to go ahead is moot. Alternatively, some buyers might also return the item if the seller insists on sending it/refuses to cancel, either as a change of mind return (if the seller's policies allow COM) or fraudulently claiming Not As Described.
Of course, it's worth keeping in mind that a buyer who does that sort of thing too often is going to be blinking bright red on eBay's radar, and may end up no longer covered under eBay's MBG, unable to open any more claims through eBay, or suspended from eBay.
Giving buyers and sellers options to cancel a transaction is eBay being pragmatic. As long as the great majority of transactions go ahead reasonably smoothly, eBay will be satisfied. eBay will very definitely not get involved in enforcing a sale if either of the parties fails to do their part - that is, buyer paying, or seller providing goods. The UA spells it out.
You'd have a case if you took the seller to small claims, but I cannot guess the outcome, given that the kitchen will by that time have been long gone to another buyer. If you can prove concomitant expenses, I would anticipate at least that the Tribunal Member will take those into account.
If eBay refused to give you the seller's contact details for the purpose of a case being filed, well, you could always name eBay in the action.
It would be lengthy, and you'd need to have evidence of everything. It's up to you to decide whether or not the trouble and cost are worth it. Remember that while your costs may be ordered to be paid by the defendant, collecting such payment may be difficult.
That is why it is unusual for either a buyer or a seller to actually proceed with a case. If the amount in question is substantial and the case egregious, it would be worth it; if not, it is probably more of a "thought revenge". (I'll take those varmints to court and make them sorry! - that sort of thing.)
The 'thousands' was bit hyperbolic, but the time of the various people involved would certainly be costed at more than a thousand dollars.
. I then spent a day organising people to help me dismantle it, transport it and reassemble it. I entered into a contract to sell it and install it. I spent hours measuring and planning. The seller then cancelled and refunded.
No the buyer was to dismantle and remove, but because the sale was cancelled it didn't happen.
Where could the buyer possibly prove concomitant expenses - the kitchen was bought on eBay - paid for - cancelled - refunded.
Any time spent planning for the purchase is on the buyer.
domino, if the buyer has paid workers, hired equipment, etc., in anticipation of dismantling and removing the kitchen, he/she would presumably have receipts.
I doubt that money has actually changed hands, but in the interests of laying out the complexity and requirements of court action, I detailed the sort of thing that a court would require.
I don't think the OP is being entirely truthful in their responses here, I don't know if it's me but they appear to only be saying what they want us to hear, and are ignoring questions that don't show a positive light on their situation.
They ignored my question about feedback left, they've implied that this is not the first time they've bought a kitchen on eBay (or on-line) and then onsold it, presumably at a decent profit. They have not said whether their "mates" who were to dismantle the kitchen have actually been paid etc etc..............
It would appear that your point is that buying something on EBay and paying for it doesn't constitute a purchase. I should have thought that is exactly the warning I was sounding above. If buying something and paying for it doesn't constitute a purchase it's a pretty dodgy marketplace. If the transaction is immediately cancelled, no problem. But if that doesn't happen, when does a purchase become a purchase? Anyway, thank you. Your comments confirm for me my thoughts that EBay is decidedly problematic.
Thanks. As above. Anyway, my view is that the seller had no intention of fulfilling supply at the sale price, so say what you will I think that is dishonesty. And I will be more circumspect in trusting EBAy in future. AND my warning above stands.
