Item not as described; sell has refused my return request, offered partial refund instead...

[tazzieterror]

TL;DR 

Is it ok for an item to show cosmetic wear when listed as "used", despite being desribed by the seller as "in new condition"?

*****

I'm just curious how this is likely to play out.

A few days ago I received a microphone purchased from an inexperienced seller.  It was listed as used, but described by the seller as being "in new condition".  When I opened it, I've discovered that it has a number of scuff marks and scratches on the body, and doesn't actually look that new at all.

I politely wrote to the seller with a couple photos, mentioned the marks, and they've replied saying they didn't really look at the cosmetic conidtion when describing it for the listing, but they can see some minor marks in the the original high-res photos they took, but as they've listed it as used (and eBay's definition of used mentions the potential for wear or cosmetic marks), it shouldnt be a problem.

I've then politely replied, explaining that since they've described it as being in "new condition", it shouldn't have any marks on it, despite being listed as used.  I apologised for the trouble, but explained I'd be puting in a return request, and then proceded to do so.

That seemed to offend the seller a lilttle; they've refused the return saying that the blemishes are within eBay's guidelines for a used item, and I should have been aware of the potential for it to have cosmetic wear. They've instead offered a partial refund of $30, which is about 15% of the sale value.

I have two questions here:

1. Is the seller correct that some cosmetic wear and scractches are acceptable, given that it was listed as used, and despite being described "as new"?

2. If I decline the partial refund, am I still able to pursue a return and full refund? What's the process that follows declining a partial refund?

Thanks in advance for any replies!

[tazzieterror]

Makes sense - getting things wrong is the only thing I get right!

[davewil1964]

---

@tazzieterror wrote:
Makes sense - getting things wrong is the only thing I get right!

---

It would seem so.

Attacking others because of their ID, or feedback, is a sure sign that you have no real answer.

[k1ooo-slr-sales]

Spoiler

looking . . . . . looking . . . . . . looking 

[tazzieterror]

I'm sorry you've somehow interpreted that as an attack, davewil - you've missed the irony I was pointing out.  Besides, jane seems more than happy to express her opinions using brash, abrasive imagery - I'm sure she's able to handle a more civily articulated rebuttel. 

*******************

janeababe wrote:

Yeah, I'm with Fix on this one....

Yay, you sold it on, made a profit, offered a refund to the seller.... but why the need for  acolades, applause, at how wonderful you are?  then posting it as an *update* 

I have highlighted the one sentence in your message to the original seller that , to me, seems like a big fat kick in the face!

IMO, Folk who do good, real good, dont need acknowledgement.
They dont require the *pat on the back*  to feel good about themselves.

You may think you have done a great thing for the original seller.... I see it as rubbing salt into the wounds you originally inflicted, then tried to pass it off as doing them a favour!

I'm sorry.... but I think that's poor form!

[janeababe]

Way too funny......

So I'm not siding with you on this thread...      I'm sure you will get over it... LOL

I'm waiting on the sellers reply to your letter. It should be a doosy!  

[tazzieterror]

---

@janeababe wrote:

I'm waiting on the sellers reply to your letter. It should be a doosy!  

---

I'll admit, I'm eager to hear from her too.