@missbelz15,
The process does require that the item is received back by the seller before the remedy is actioned by the seller. It's not a case of your being treated like a criminal.
Consider, for instance, how you'd feel if, when buying on eBay, the mere fact of a postage lodgement were sufficient for the seller, or eBay, to conclude that you have received the item. Actually... this is complicated by the Sale of Goods Act 1923 (NSW - because eBay Australia is under NSW legislation), in which it is stated:
❝35 Delivery to carrier
- Where in pursuance of a contract of sale the seller is authorised or required to send the goods to the buyer, delivery of the goods to a carrier, whether named by the buyer or not, for the purpose of transmission to the buyer, is prima facie deemed to be a delivery of the goods to the buyer.
- Unless otherwise authorised by the buyer, the seller must make such contract with the carrier on behalf of the buyer as may be reasonable, having regard to the nature of the goods and the other circumstances of the case. If the seller omit so to do, and the goods are lost or damaged in course of transit, the buyer may decline to treat the delivery to the carrier as a delivery to the buyer, or may hold the seller responsible in damages.❞
So, strictly speaking, if the seller adequately prepares the goods for delivery as required, and contracts with a carrier (AP, courier, whatever it may be) to deliver the goods by appropriate means (for example, item is in the right sort of packaging, double-boxed if necessary, and it's to be couriered by authorised courier with sufficient insurance, and the buyer has implicitly agreed to that delivery method), then under this Act the goods are deemed to have been delivered to the buyer when they passed into the hands of the carrier.
For the sake of argument, we'll have to ignore this legislation and just concentrate on how eBay treats the issue of buyer protection and seller protection with relation to proof of postage or proof of delivery. eBay makes it very clear that proof of delivery to the buyer's address is required to trigger seller protection, not just proof of postage/despatch. If the seller can provide the tracking details showing that the item has been delivered, the buyer would have a very difficult time asserting non-delivery. It's rare (not impossible, but rare) for tracking status showing "Delivered" to be in contradiction of what has actually happened... that is, the item has not been delivered.
Let's say then that you have ordered something, and the seller tells you they've sent it. You still haven't received the item, and you ask the seller about the status of the order. They tell you it's been sent, and that's that. Would the seller be entitled to feel like a criminal when you tell them, "But it hasn't been delivered"? No; the seller would need evidence of the item's delivery, not just its despatch, in order to have seller protection on eBay.
Ditto when a buyer returns an item. It's not whether or not you use a postage label that proves the item's been returned... Rather, it is the online tracking showing that the item has been delivered. eBay requires that sort of evidence under its policies. (As others have said, your seller really should not be promising a refund or replacement sooner than the receipt of the returned item, in order to protect themselves and in order to act under the protections and processes established by eBay.)
