Ebay Sellers Delivery dates:

[jcut6405]

I recently had a purchase, where the seller had a estimated  delivery date which was not met, when I enquired I was informed they were away, and the Ebay ad had been flagged.

I looked at the Ad and yes there was a small print note high on the left hand corner of the ad, whilst the estimated delivery date was clearly evident in bold large print. below the item for sale

As a result I cancelled the order as instead of having to wait 7 days to receive it would have been 30 days.

This was an annoying waste of my time.

Why does Ebay allow absent sellers to list and item for sale with an Estimated delivery date prominently shown, when the seller has no intention of meeting this delivery time.

Why is a seller even allowed to list on Ebay at a time when they are away and cannot despatch the goods as advertised on the Ebay site.

I believe Ebay needs to have a look at this practice, if they wish to retain their buyers.

[enigmabear]

Yep, I had one a while ago, paid about 8 or 9 on a Saturday night and when I got on the computer Sunday morning there was a message asking had I posted (and it was a package in a box so not like I could put it in a red street box)

Mind you, they also took four days to pay

[porcelain_dolls_by_me]

The problem with "estimated" delivery dates is that buyers take this as being gospel and if item has not arrived by the end delivery date open an INR case.

[egglesdtp]

---

@enigmabear wrote:

Yep, I had one a while ago, paid about 8 or 9 on a Saturday night and when I got on the computer Sunday morning there was a message asking had I posted (and it was a package in a box so not like I could put it in a red street box)

Mind you, they also took four days to pay

---

Unbelievable. And to make it worse, they expected you to post before they had even paid!!!

[k1ooo-slr-sales]

---

@porcelain_dolls_by_me wrote:

The problem with "estimated" delivery dates is that buyers take this as being gospel and if item has not arrived by the end delivery date open an INR case.

---

that’s because eBay tell them that if it doesn’t arrive within the estimated time they can get a refund.  eBay are trying to build buyer confidence that they will receive their item promptly by providing the (optimistic) delivery estimates . . . . but it is sellers who are bearing the cost of implementing this policy.

[digital*ghost]

---

@springyzone wrote:

A lot of sellers here seem dead against the ETA being applied to purchases.

I understand they are ebay estimates and sometimes they are too hopeful. However, I think there does have to be some estimated delivery date or date range shown.

---

The problem with ebay's ETA is how they are presented.

Rather than doing what most sites do when they address delivery times, they show a line that says "On or before [specific date]" on a lot of listings. Doing that is what creates the idea that the specified date is the due date, and if it arrives after that, the package is sudddenly late - there's a really big difference between saying this service usually takes 5-7 days, and (effectively) you'll get your item by 25th January. It's ok for individual sites where they can guarantee delivery timeframes because they use their own delivery system, or exclusively use couriers that are very reliable, but the truth is even many of the biggest websites in Australia will only give a specific date once the item is actually in the hands of the carrier, and the carrier's ETA has been established. JB (for media) don't even give ETAs at all, from memory, they just say it's virtually pointless to contact them about a delivery unless 10 business days have passed since it was dispatched. 

Most sites I purchase from present the information in the same kind of less specific way, which gives people a good idea of when to expect their order, but doesn't give them the impression that there's a specific date the package should arrive by.

I would be much happier if eBay took that approach as well, and it's the apporach I take elsewhere (I say something along the lines that in most cases, delivery to metropolitan areas will be between 3-5 business days, and around 10 for rural areas, but to allow a few extra days for Aus Post delays if something hasn't arrived within those timeframes. This still provides people with a readily understood timeframe to plan ahead for, or around, a delivery if they need to, but doesn't create unnecessary problems like "late" delivery if it took 6 business days. 

This is better for me, because I don't have to field "my item is late" messages 4 days after posting, and it's good for the buyers because they don't usually start worrying about something so soon after purchase - even if the item arrives within, or a day or so after, the ETA, the worry remains part of the experience. 

So, yeah, I wish eBay would stop giving my buyers things to be anxious about needlessly. (It isn't just the ETAs, they undermine sellers in may other ways, some subtle, some less so). 

That being said, I agree with all the other comments in the thread about the seller having some responsibility in adjusting handling times in these cases. Some sellers may not know about doing something like that, so perhaps if an automated extension wasn't feasible, ebay could just provide a little pop up warning when holiday mode is activated and remind people that ETAs will still be based on their handling time, and if they won't be posting items in their usual timeframe, to consider extending it. 

[springyzone]

---

@shoppingbag* wrote:
You seem to be confusing postage times with delivery times. I have a "within 3 business days" postage time. Posted a large letter within an hour. Got complaints from buyer who lives the other side of the country because it took three days to arrive, dinged me 3 stars for postage time. Also 3 stars for the postage cost of $2 (I paid for the padded envelope) Is this fair?

---

No, I am not confusing the two at all.

I've already said, ebay has to have some way of leaving an indication to customers of how quickly things are posted out. 

Just having a seller say in an ad that they post within XX days doesn't cut it. Unfortunately there has to be some accountability.

Without tracking details, there is no way to prove anything has been sent off in the promised handling time.

Many small items are sent without tracking. I'm not knocking that, but without tracking, the only other alternative I can see is to give an estimated delivery date range.

I think ebay could have a 2 way system. items with tracking-where the seller only had to prove they were in the postage system in the handling time indicated in the ad to get an auto 5 stars for postage time. But all other items would still need an estimated delivery date range.

I never said anywhere that all customer feedback was going to be fair. In fact i said it can be very subjective & no, your customer wasn't fair. But that can be the case with feedback about any aspect of the sale, not just postage time.

 I do think though if there are ads that promise something, ebay has to have some way of enforcing those promises where possible.

[springyzone]

---

@shoppingbag* wrote:

If a Seller posts within their time frame (quoted on listings) then they should not be responsible for delivery times. I once had an item sent from two suburbs away that took two weeks for Australia Post to deliver.  YES, it was posted on the right day, postmark date on the parcel was clearly displayed.

---

I agree with that, but how is a seller going to prove that without tracking?

Many letters & packages never have the postmark date stamped on them or it is not legible.

[springyzone]

---

@digital*ghost wrote:

---

@springyzone wrote:

A lot of sellers here seem dead against the ETA being applied to purchases.

I understand they are ebay estimates and sometimes they are too hopeful. However, I think there does have to be some estimated delivery date or date range shown.

---

The problem with ebay's ETA is how they are presented.

Rather than doing what most sites do when they address delivery times, they show a line that says "On or before [specific date]" on a lot of listings. Doing that is what creates the idea that the specified date is the due date, and if it arrives after that, the package is sudddenly late - there's a really big difference between saying this service usually takes 5-7 days, and (effectively) you'll get your item by 25th January. It's ok for individual sites where they can guarantee delivery timeframes because they use their own delivery system, or exclusively use couriers that are very reliable, but the truth is even many of the biggest websites in Australia will only give a specific date once the item is actually in the hands of the carrier, and the carrier's ETA has been established. JB (for media) don't even give ETAs at all, from memory, they just say it's virtually pointless to contact them about a delivery unless 10 business days have passed since it was dispatched. 

Most sites I purchase from present the information in the same kind of less specific way, which gives people a good idea of when to expect their order, but doesn't give them the impression that there's a specific date the package should arrive by.

I would be much happier if eBay took that approach as well,

---

I agree with what you say, but the problem for ebay (as I see it) is it is not in charge of posting things out. The sellers are.

I buy a lot online & I don't usually get a guaranteed delivery date but as you said, there is an estimated range. Usually it says something along the lines of "orders are dispatched within 4-5 business days"

But here's the thing-they carry through with that & are usually faster.

A business that doesn't can soon get into trouble. I have seen it happen where buyer backlash was brutal.

Now ebay sellers could have a similar dispatch range in their listings, but ebay has to have some way of ensuring they carry through.

To me, it would be enough for sellers to upload tracking details to show the item is posted & in the system within the advertised dispatch time & those sellers should then be covered. In the ads, instead of a delivery date advertised, the dispatch time frame could be displayed.

But we keep coming back to the fact many items aren't sent with tracking. 

It would be useless saying to those sellers that they could just display a dispatch date range, if there is no way of checking that it has been followed through and no consequences to any sellers if they didn't keep to it. For untracked items, I can't see many alternatives except a delivery date range. 

[digital*ghost]

---

@springyzone wrote:

---

For untracked items, I can't see many alternatives except a delivery date range. 

---

My point was that can be provided without creating a "due date".

You mentioned earlier that a lot of sellers would be pretty lax in posting out items in years gone buy, and attributed the improvement of things to eBay's ETAs - is it not possible that, since correlation doesn't always mean causation, that it can also be attributed to the fact that there are fewer casual sellers here now and more experienced and / or business-oriented sellers, who understand the importance of shipping quickly?

[brerrabbit585]

---

@digital*ghost wrote:

---

The problem with ebay's ETA is how they are presented.

---

I'd say that's only half the problem.  The biggest problem is that people don't use their brains and think for themselves!  I honestly think that anyone who's had more than half a dozen letters or packages sent to them should know that Australia Post delivery times can't be predicted accurately.

I had an interesting conversation with a buyer recently and she's always wondered whether answering the question about whether an item arrived before a certain date had consequences for a seller or whether ebay was just doing a survey.  After I explained it she said she'd never answer that question again.  At least she'd given it some thought instead of just blindly answering.