OMG-Paypal does my head in !! lol

[foxette-in-sox]

Bought 2 pairs of kids swimmers-opened 1 pack,perfect so left pos feedback for BOTH even though I hadn't opened 2nd packet :_|

2nd pair looked they'd been torn by shredding machine although NO damage to packet itself.

Emailed seller & attached 4 photo's.

Seller said-in VERY bad English-you cut them.

I was like WTF??

Long story short,they refused to replace,they only cost $12.99 per pair with free postage.

Opened Paypal dispute,sent photo's to Paypal also,was told to return ???,told Paypal at least 6 times that

1-Would cost WAY more to return than item cost

2-I was NOT claiming for 2 pairs of swimmers,just the ONE damaged pair.

3-I did NOT want refund,just replacement of the ONE pair of damaged swimmers

ARRGGHHHH

So just now,Paypal has decided no one is at fault & they have refunded me for BOTH pairs from Paypal money NOT sellers account.

Not sure if I should :O;\:^O

[tall_bearded]

Wrong on every count, but then what’s new

As an example here is an extract of the South Australian Sales of goods Act

SALE OF GOODS ACT 1895 - SECT 57

57—Auction sales

(1)         In the case of a sale by auction—

(a)         where goods are put up for sale by auction in lots, each lot is prima facie deemed to be the subject of a separate contract of sale;

(b)         a sale by auction is complete when the auctioneer announces its completion by the fall of the hammer, ...

(c)         where a sale by auction is not notified to be subject to a right to bid on behalf of the seller, it shall not be lawful for the seller to bid himself or to employ any person to bid at such sale, or for the auctioneer knowingly to take any bid from the seller or any such person. Any sale contravening this rule may be treated as fraudulent by the buyer;

(d)         a sale by auction may be notified to be subject to a reserved or upset price, and a right to bid may a...seller.

(2)         Where a right to bid is expressly reserved, but not otherwise, the seller, or any one person on his behalf, may bid at the auction.

So where in this section do you say it says that a goods sold at auction are excluded from the other consumer protection provisions contained in other parts of the same legislation. 

Or to put it another way, are you seriously suggesting that in the case of say a phone bidder who has had no opportunity to inspect the goods before bidding, and as such is relying on the description as  provided by the auctioneer as to condition when bidding, that bidder has no legal recourse if the condition of the goods were misrepresented.

[foxette-in-sox]

Er sorry to interupt BUT its kinda all worked out in the end & granddaughter chose new swimmers which I bought & paid for last night.:-x

[phorum_junkie*]

As an example here is an extract of the South Australian Sales of goods Act

Which applies to a Chinese seller how?

As you very well know ebay auctions are not the same as a B&M run auction house auction, can you find me one single case where a buyer has managed to get their money back for an ebay auction item, without having to return it, using the sale of goods act?

[tall_bearded]

“It also does not apply to a private seller or to auction goods”, coupled with “As you very well know ebay auctions are not the same as a B&M run auction house auction”

Have you ever read the Sales of Goods Act, because if you had actually bothered to do so, you would have found that, unlike other consumer protection legislation (the Trade Practices Act and the Fair Trading Act) which apply to businesses, the Sales of Goods Act applies to all sales contracts irrespective of whether the item was sold by a business by a private individual. 

That is didn’t the NSW Supreme Court in Peter Smythe v Vincent Thomas [2007] NSWSC 844, which mind you was an eBay action where both the buyer and seller were private ind...

So do you now accept that Smythe v Vincent is authority to the effect that all eBay.au transactions, both auction and BIN, are subject to the Sales of Goods Act, and if not, why not? 

In the alternative, if you now accept that the Sales of Gods Act applies to all goods sold on eBay.au, do you accept that whole of the Act applies including provisions such as deemed delivery and the right of the buyer to refuse to accept delivery if the item is Not Significantly as Described and if not why not.

As for the goods purchased off shore, I am on the record of having repeated said, If you buy on line from places like China, use PayPal because, inadequate as it may be, it’s the only protection you have; which translates into, don’t buy from China because, just as the Sales of Goods Act is not enforceable in places such as China, nor are the Buyer Protection provision of the Australian PayPal User Agreement.