Some weeks ago I bought a book advertised on Ebay by a seller in USA. Paid the seller the stated price + postage. Next I receive a message from the seller: VERY sorry but the item is not available, don't know how it came to be still listed on Ebay, etc., etc., etc. Of course the seller will refund me the money ($37.00 Australian, including postage), etc. Another message: Seller asks how I want my refund?! Cheque, international bank deposit? Paypal, etc., etc., etc!!! Very apologetic when it turns out that he can do NONE of the above!!!!!!!
So, it looks like an IMPASSE? Complicated by the Seller confiding in me that he is RETIRING from Ebay! "Take the money and run" sprang to mind??? Perhaps I am being a little harsh, but to me the whole incident smells just a tad "ratty".
Anyway, is there anything that Ebay can do here, bearing in mind that the Seller may have vamoosed?
I'm posting this here because I have been unable to find an email address for Ebay! Just FAQs of all shapes and sizes!! But nothing of much use to me.
If you had a question, you could have always started a new thread to ask it.
As an aside, though, I think you will find that Australian consumer law only applies to Australia, when both parties are in-country.
eBay (and Paypal) clearly state their terms and conditions. The prudent path would have been to open a case for not received within the allowed timeframes. That way you would have got your money back at least.
I certainly wouldn't be waiting for delivery over a month, much less 18, if I'd paid several thousand euros for something.
That's just me, though. I pay attention to the rules that apply to the sites I use.
YOU: "That's just me, though. I pay attention to the rules that apply to the sites I use."
ME: really. thx for recognising an ebay loophole I've discovered, albeit unwiitingly, & offering nothing community-minded to prevent other ebay users from being at risk of suffering same. If you dont want to help brainstorm how we could address this loophole as an urgent issue that ebay should not be allowed to ignore, then you are offering this so-called community nothing but a repeat of what eBay does to avoid its obligatioons by repeating its TC's until victims give-up in disgust.
As for "hijacking" someone elses question. I had no idea how to start my own so simply added my own frustrations & learnt what to do next, based on the inadequate support I got from ebay personnel.../... "ebay community members" - evidently, no such demopnstration of support, so dont try to convince me / otherwise.
YOU: "That's just me, though. I pay attention to the rules that apply to the sites I use."
ME: really. thx for recognising an ebay loophole I've discovered, albeit unwiitingly, & offering nothing community-minded to prevent other ebay users from being at risk of suffering same. If you dont want to help brainstorm how we could address this loophole as an urgent issue that ebay should not be allowed to ignore, then you are offering this so-called community nothing but a repeat of what eBay does to avoid its obligatioons by repeating its TC's until victims give-up in disgust.
As for "hijacking" someone elses question. I had no idea how to start my own so simply added my own frustrations & learnt what to do next, based on the inadequate support I got from ebay personnel.../... "ebay community members" - evidently, no such demopnstration of support, so dont try to convince me / otherwise.
Caveat emptor.
It is NOT a loophole, it is a legally enforcable term of using the site.
If you reckon you should be able to make a claim after 18 months, why not 2 years? 10? 50? When would you think it reasonable for eBay to put a limit on claims? About a week after you got yours approved, I'll warrant.
There is nothing to brainstorm - you are way past the time for any claim. All you could do is report it to ACORN's successor (as I believe the countess suggested) and hope they get Interpol involved. But that's it.
To start a thread in 'Ask a Member', you go to the community home page and enter your question. Or 'buying (this board)' and at the top is 'new message'.
ME: not actually my problem TO SUPERVISE eBayโs "contracts with its sellers" - when ebayโs LACK OF OVERSIGHT is facilitating the platform by which ebay's seller IS STILL SELLING & DEFRAUDING - unabated unequivocally by eBay who is therefore responsible for any damages or losses caused to its users as a consequence of ENABLING A "CRIMINAL ACT" (FRAUD: NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS APPLY). Also; caused, BY EBAY'S lack of ENDURING PROTECTION - AKA - NOT HAVING CHECKS & BALANCES IN PLACE TO ALLOW REPORTING TO PREVENT REPEAT OFFENDING - ONLY THEN COULD EBAY ARGUE IT COULD NOT BE HELD NEGLIGENT (REGARDLESS OF WETHER THE โCRIMEโ is a 1, 10, OR 50 year old incident, FRAUD IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE; THUS, [REPEAT] VOID OF A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ). Conversely putting THE WHOLE โEBAY COMMUNITY (LIKE, YOU KNOW, โOTHERSโ) at risk, by attempting to enforce a policy which is an IMPEDIMENT (THUS LEGALLY REDUNDANT) to the reporting of criminal offences on its platform.
ร
YOU: It is NOT a loophole, it is a legally enforcable term of using the site.
ME: (OUT-OF-TIME) IS โNOTโ ENFORCEABLE WHEN ITโS โWILFULLY ABUSED WITH INTENTโ TO AVOID REFUNDING A FAILED โEBAY-CONTRACTEDโ PURCHASE ORDER. In such circumstances ebay has an obligation to have systems in place to allow reporting of anything that prevents harm to othersโฆ {the legal case references available which ANY legal counsel can have a court rely on, are endless. EVER HEARD OF EBAY BEING A JOINT TORT FEASOR & LEGALLY LIABLE PURSUANT TOโฆ[โฆbest we leave that one to class-action lawyers]}
ร
YOU: If you reckon you should be able to make a claim after 18 months, why not 2 years? 10? 50? When would you think it reasonable for eBay to put a limit on claims? About a week after you got yours approved, I'll warrant.
ME: {already referred at [para;โ2โ] above}
ร
YOU: There is nothing to brainstorm - you are way past the time for any claim. All you could do is report it to ACORN's successor (as I believe the countless suggested) and hope they get Interpol involved. But that's it.
ME: Interpol dont even need to get involved, the culprit is STILL using eBay & ---โeBay will be askedโโ- why they aided & abetted (ENABLED) the seller by not acting (IN THE PAST) to prevent others (LIKE ME) from being defrauded - despite the seller being reported;โฆ((EVEN, RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW โ SCREENSHOT in all its glory ))
ร
YOU: To start a thread in 'Ask a Member', you go to the community home page and enter your question. Or 'buying (this board)' and at the top is 'new message'.
ME: Thank you.
ร
YOU: Not difficult to understand...
ME: Not true, but youโre entitled to your opinion.
From my previous post in the Answer Centre... in the hope that it will help fellow buyers to prevent a problem purchase, or to remedy a problem purchase within the available timeframe.
... of course it inspires confidence that in the event of a problem, eBay will refund you. HOWEVER... the very fact that there is a link saying "learn more" indicates that there are probably terms and conditions. Life experience should also inform us that there are likely to be terms and conditions... I don't know of any guarantee that is open-ended.
Caveat: In my view, eBay could make it even clearer by saying something like "T&Cs apply. Learn more." But in a legal battle, the link saying 'Learn more" would (in my judgement) be enough, particularly since a belief that a Money Back Guarantee would cover a transaction without limit and exception would not be reasonable. (Even our Consumer Legislation doesn't protect the consumer without limit.)
If you see this:
This member is an eBay Top-rated seller
Consistently receives highest buyer ratings
Posts items quickly
Earned a track record of excellent service
... in the seller's profile page, again it would give you confidence in the seller. However, bear in mind that eBay judges sellers by different methodology than individual buyers judge their sellers. No matter who endorses the seller, it does not mean that we buyers abrogate our judgement and thought processes, blindly trusting the seller. (To me, TRS is largely meaningless. I've seen many high-volume purveyors of cheap rubbish on eBay given TRS status. It just means that the sellers know how to meet eBay's metrics. It's hard to know how eBay could improve the methodology... and even if I had the answer, eBay are unlikely to implement it.)
The eBay Top-rated seller rating means that many more buyers have left positive feedback than negative feedback, but I can see several ways that this can be manipulated. (I won't mention them.) Even if the seller does NOT manipulate the system, the system is in my view inherently flawed:
some dissatisfied buyers will not leave feedback at all, because they were refunded or because it was sorted out in some other way or because they didn't feel it was so bad that it deserved a negative
quite a lot of buyers tend not to leave feedback
some buyers only leave feedback if the experience was awful (so this does skew total results down)
some buyers wait, and the item doesn't arrive but the timeframe (60 days) for leaving feedback has lapsed
some feedback will be removed because it breaches eBay policy (for instance, mentioning a dispute, using profanity, and so on)
feedback falls off the radar and out of the seller's feedback percentage after 12 months
Don't mistake me; feedback from buyers can still be an important indicator! But it shouldn't be relied upon exclusively. In particular, when buying from an overseas seller against whom you have no legal remedy if something goes amiss, you shouldn't think, "Oh, it'll be all right; this is a Top-rated seller. Evem though it's almost a month late, I will keep waiting."
My view: irrespective of the seller's status, don't ever let the timeframe for a dispute go past, if there is a problem.
You might also come across sellers with the eBay Premium Service badge:
All that this means is that the seller offers free postage to Australian buyers (or rather, postage included in the item price (OR subsidised by the government for Chinese sellers), since there is no such thing as free postage) and a 30+ day money back return for change of mind. 30+ does not mean infinite; in fact, for the purpose of getting this rating, it means "at least 30 days". For the majority of such sellers, it will mean quite literally 30 days because they offer it in order to meet the eBay Premium Service conditions.
It also doesn't mean that the seller pays for the return postage; for many eBay Premium Service sellers, the Return Policy specifically states that the buyer is responsible for return postage cost. Don't forget that the buyer needs to send via a tracked postage method, and for overseas items this may well cost the buyer more than the original item price. It may end up not being worth it to proceed with a change of mind return.
My view: eBay Premium Service does NOT mean that the seller is a trustworthy seller.
The eBay Money Back Guarantee
I realise that not many buyers take the time to read through eBay's policies. The relevant pages are a right old muddle. For your information, here's the link to the eBay Money Back Guarantee policy page.
However, when you read the Shop with Confidence spiel on a listing, you will also see the Learn more link, which leads to a brightly coloured specially prepared page for buyers, all about the Money Back Guarantee.
It states:
โFree Automatic Coverage on Eligible Purchases*โ
Already, the asterisk notifies that there are T&Cs, and that not all purchases are eligible. The asterisked note is:
โ*Items must be paid for via eBay checkout or an eBay invoice, using an eligible payment method. Category exclusions apply. For full terms and conditions, read our eBay Money Back Guarantee policy.โ
Fair enough. It even links to the policy page... and if all buyers read the policy page, it would be great. (However, human nature being what it is, most buyers do not read the policy page... at least, not before they go ahead and purchase.)
I will say this for that buyer-friendly MBG page, though. The important information about timeframe is clearly spelled out in the bit with the magenta/pink background:
โIn most cases, sellers will fix the problem straight away. Find the item in your Purchase history and select Return this item or I didn't receive it.
You need to do this within 30 days of the actual delivery date, or the estimated delivery date if an item hasnโt arrived.โ
(Because we can't specify background colours here on the boards, I'll use a magenta/pink font colour instead for illustrative purposes.)
eBay go on to say that if the seller hasn't resolved the issue after 3 business days, the buyer can ask eBay to step in, which in most cases leads to a refund if the item hasn't arrived.
Caveat: I don't think it's sufficiently clearly spelled out that unless a buyer DOES ask eBay to step in (in the event of the seller not resolving the issue), the dispute will be closed after 3 weeks without the buyer receiving a refund. In my view, this should be stated on the buyer-friendly MBG page... It is stated on the MBG policy page when you expand the Read our full policy button, under the (expanded) eBay Money Back Guarantee timelines button:
โIf neither the buyer nor the seller asks us to step in within 21 business days of reporting that they didn't receive an item, the request closes automatically.โ
Buying from Australian businesses (and private sellers)
If you're buying from an Australian business, you have protections under Australian Consumer Legislation. In particular, you should make sure that you're buying from a registered business, that the business name is good, and that the business is an authorised reseller for the brand that you're buying. You'll have warranty, fit-for-purpose protection, the ability to have the item replaced or repaired in case of defect, and of course if the business tries to defraud you, you can pursue that business under Australian law.
Of course, avoid putting yourself in the position of being an unsecured creditor when a business is trading insolvent... Even our consumer legislation can't protect the consumer if the consumer's prepaid, for instance, for an item not currently in stock from a major retailer that's about to go under administration - as many unhappy buyers discovered when the Dick Smith retail chain went kaput in 2016 under Anchorage Capital Partners.
If you buy from a private Australian seller, you don't have the same protection, but you can of course pursue a private individual who defrauded you - civil and criminal.
Buying from overseas sellers
If you buy from an overseas business, there is no way to enforce that business's promises and warranties, but of course if you buy directly from a major brand, they do tend to honour their warranties. There is a drawback in that it's generally your responsibility to pay for the item to be sent to the manufacturer, and that could be a significant cost.
If you buy from an overseas seller on eBay (not the actual brand), no matter what warranties and glowing promises are made by the seller, those are just words as there is no international body enforcing some sort of global consumer protection.
But what you DO have is protection from eBay itself under their T&Cs (up to 30 days after the latest Estimated Delivery Date) and/or from PayPal under their T&Cs (up to 180 days from the date of purchase). You will also have protection from your credit card provider (see their T&Cs for timeframe).
These remedies are available to us as consumers on eBay, and especially in respect of PayPal, it's a generous timeframe.
If we allow a problem to go beyond those timeframes, we cannot expect eBay or PayPal to extend that protection beyond the T&Cs to which we agreed when we signed up. Ditto for credit card fraud protection - we should be aware of T&Cs for that.
The best protection of all
The best protection is still our own vigilance. Let's not be trusting to the point of naรฏvetรฉ. Be scrupulous before purchase - avoid sellers where there's any red flag. Be especially careful when it's a significant expenditure! Be even more careful with overseas sellers. If it's too risky - don't buy. Or at the very least... don't let an unresolved problem go on the basis of a seller's promise; that's just spit in the wind. Use the tools of protection before it's too late.
The best protection is still our own vigilance. Let's not be trusting to the point of naรฏvetรฉ. Be scrupulous before purchase - avoid sellers where there's any red flag. Be especially careful when it's a significant expenditure! Be even more careful with overseas sellers. If it's too risky - don't buy. Or at the very least... don't let an unresolved problem go on the basis of a seller's promise; that's just spit in the wind. Use the tools of protection before it's too late.
Indeed countess, but in one of vander's responses on the AC boards they said this :-
"there's THREE emails explicitly sent within ebay and paypal's dispute limitation timeframes"
So it's entirely possible vander was aware of the time constraints in both eBay and Paypal but chose, for whatever reason, not to pursue an INR claim for the 3,000 euros.
If vandegraaff8 was sent three emails within the dispute limitation timeframe - presumably by eBay - why did vandegraaff8 not open a dispute or (if the dispute was open) ask eBay to step in? To ignore emails that reminded him/her that time was running out to resolve the issue in those ways would be bizarre.
That's why I am leaning towards suspecting that vandegraaff8 SENT three emails within the dispute limitation timeframe. (At least that would make more sense.)
@vandegraaff8, if that's what you did - sending three emails - that is still not what eBay's T&Cs say you must do. The policy page explicitly states that you have to ask eBay to step in (within the report itself), because if the seller does not resolve the issue and you fail to ask eBay to resolve it, the request times out. Once timed out, the request can't be re-opened using eBay's automatic processes.
You could at that point have contacted eBay via "Have us call you" to ask for the request to be re-opened on the basis of not having realised that you should have asked eBay to step in. Even then, it would have been at eBay's discretion.
If you sent emails, were you not aware that emails to eBay aren't linked to the dispute process? They are processed (slowly - 3 days is not unusual) automatically by keyword bots, resulting in a bot-generated response. No human would have read those emails. If you'd replied to the first (bot-generated) email, the reply would still, very likely, have got no further than a second bot-generated response. Anecdotally it takes a few replies (within the same reply-answer reply-answer set of emails, NOT a new email with a new email subject) before the system picks up that human intervention is called for.
And... even if human intervention had finally been achieved, it would still not have been your required response withiin the eBay Resolution Centre process. eBay have set up their MBG within an automatic process that requires specific input from buyer and seller. By default, if you don't request eBay (within the dispute) to step in, it won't happen.
BUT... if you mean that you specifically did request eBay to step in (within the dispute process), and eBay failed to step in, that's another matter. In that case, I would get on to eBay asap via "Have us call you", to explain. (With enormous courtesy, not least because you're asking for something outside their automatic process which means you are at their mercy.)
Before I say any more on this, I think it has to be clarified exactly what you did do, from start to finish - every step you took, how you took it... When you say "three emails explicitly sent", you have to clarify who sent the emails. If you mean that you asked eBay to do something, you have to clarify where, how, using what service/process.
I don't want to give false hope, but at least we can work out what specifically has gone wrong, if you've made an error or if eBay has somehow failed to act according to their T&Cs.
Consistently receives highest buyer ratings
eBay Premium Service
