Amount of unpaid items on the increase

[mamacurrieshobby]

Has anyone else had an increase in the unpaid item cases they are opening. Mine have doubled. What makes me mad is when you go into the buyers Feedback the amount of items that have buyer didnt pay. One buyer had at least 10 how can eBay still allow them to trade. Biggest time wasters. I might add, it's not newbies its buyers that are it paying. Sorry had to have a winge.

[jawsnine]

I am also getting a huge increase in people asking to cancel BIN sales for so many different reasons. I've had 2 in the last 24 hours and 2 more in the last 7 days.

[k1ooo-slr-sales]

Sorry but you are missing the point. It is not good business sense to block bidders before you have a problem with them. Of course once they refuse to pay for one of my items they are blocked then and NOT before and only if they do not have a good reason or do not answer my messages. You would have to be crazy to block all bidders with one strike as there are many reasons that a buyer may have not paid for an item on one occassion. The point is that Ebay needs to do something about the SERIAL time wasters. That is one of the reasons we pay the high fees for. It should not be the sellers responsability to control the non payers. It is up to Ebay to be more helpful and penalize these non payers in a far more meaningful way.

I'm not missing the point at all.  I am an informed seller.

For starters, the non-payer block can't be applied to buyers with one strike.  It can be applied to buyers with more than one strike.

ALSO, sellers can choose to block buyers with more than one strike in the last 12 months, in the last six months, or the last 1 month.  A seller can apply the lenient block of more than one strike in the last 1 month so that buyers who got a strike three months ago could still bid, but those that have become serial pests can not bid/buy.

You state  "It is not good business sense to block bidders before you have a problem with them" and then go on to say "The point is that Ebay needs to do something about the SERIAL time wasters".  eBay have done something . . . . they have given ALL sellers the tools to block these pests.  When sellers choose to not use blocks for serial non-payers they should not complain when a serial non-payer wastes their time.

[dylan11235813]

A post is now gone for some reason

There is no point to buyer feedback.....

[digital*ghost]

You can increase the number of strikes a buyer has to have received before they're blocked, too - up to 5. The most lenient would then be any buyer who has received 5 (or more) strikes within one month is blocked, so you do have a bit of room to move and decide what you consider to be a serial pest. 

[k1ooo-slr-sales]

dg, thanks for that information.  I've only ever used the "more than one strike" setting and forgot about having the ability to change that to a more lenient 5. 

I am even more informed now  🙂

[digital*ghost]

No problem 🙂 - I personally decided on more than 2 in 6 months before a buyer is blocked, partly to account for any legitimate problems outside of the buyer's control, or maybe they've a hiccup or two along the way but predominantly make good on purchases... :^O At the moment I'm averaging 2-3 NPB a year, which is less than 1% of all sales, though I know there are items/categories that seem to attract them at a greater percentage, so I might be a bit tougher if I was getting a higher rate of NPBs. 

[dylan11235813]

No problem 🙂 - I personally decided on more than 2 in 6 months before a buyer is blocked, partly to account for any legitimate problems outside of the buyer's control, or maybe they've a hiccup or two along the way but predominantly make good on purchases... :^O At the moment I'm averaging 2-3 NPB a year, which is less than 1% of all sales, though I know there are items/categories that seem to attract them at a greater percentage, so I might be a bit tougher if I was getting a higher rate of NPBs. 

that's just sick

[viewmont1071]

I'm not missing the point at all.  I am an informed seller.

For starters, the non-payer block can't be applied to buyers with one strike.  It can be applied to buyers with more than one strike.

ALSO, sellers can choose to block buyers with more than one strike in the last 12 months, in the last six months, or the last 1 month.  A seller can apply the lenient block of more than one strike in the last 1 month so that buyers who got a strike three months ago could still bid, but those that have become serial pests can not bid/buy.

You state  "It is not good business sense to block bidders before you have a problem with them" and then go on to say "The point is that Ebay needs to do something about the SERIAL time wasters".  eBay have done something . . . . they have given ALL sellers the tools to block these pests.  When sellers choose to not use blocks for serial non-payers they should not complain when a serial non-payer wastes their time.

Here's some points you are missing

1 NO MATTER HOW MANY SELLERS COMPLETE UPI DISPUTES THE BUYER HAS THE ABILITY TO HAVE THOSE STRIKES REMOVED. I COUNTED A BUYER WHO HAD OVER 90 POSITIVE NEGATIVES BUT BOUGHT FROM A SELLER WHO HAD THE SEVEREST UPI BLOCKS AVAILABLE... APPLY YOUR POST 6 2 IN 10 RATIO TO THAT SUCKER.

2 EBAY (NOT ME) ADVERTISE FEEDBACK AS "THE FOUNDATION OF TRUST" BETWEEN BUYERS AND SELLERS

....... THAT'S HOW IMPORTANT EBAY THINKS BUYER AND SELLER FEEDBACK IS....

THAT'S WHY SOME SELLERS COMPLAIN WHEN THEY CANNOT LEAVE FEEDBACK APPROPRIATE TO THEIR PERCEPTION OF THE TRADE OR NON TRADE AS THE CASE MAY BE

3 THE IMPORTANCE OF SELLERS BEING ALLOWED TO LEAVE UNIMPEDED BUYER FEEDBACK CAN BE EXEMPLIFIED IN ONE PARAGRAPH THAT CAN BE FOUND IN EBAYS OWN POLICIES....AND I QUOTE

http://pages.ebay.com.au/help/policies/feedback-terms.html

"Feedback is the foundation of trust on eBay. Having terms and conditions that dissuade an individual from leaving feedback undermines the integrity of the feedback system and decreases trust within the eBay marketplace."

4 TRY FINDING EBAY ANYWHERE IN IT'SN POLICIES STATING THAT BUYER FEEDBACK IS UNIMPORTANT....SO WHY DO YOU

5 IF EBAY LEFT  A $$$ NPB MARK UPON A NPB DISPUTE BEING AWARDED TO A SELLER THEN IT WOULD INSTIL CONFIDENCE IN SELLERS AND THE NPB SYSTEM  THROUGH VISUAL REINFORCEMENT (IE. AS PER YOUR POST 6 IF 10 NPB STRIKES WERE OFFICIALLY RECORDED ON THAT BUYERS FEEDBACK IN THE LAST 6 MONTHS AND A SELLER HAD THEIR BLOCKS SET THEY COULD TELL WHETHER THE BLOCKS WERE WORKING OR WHETHER EBAY REMOVED THEM AT THE BUYERS EVERY WHIM

....... IE IT MAKES THE "STRIKE" PROCESS TRANSPARENT

THAT'S HOW NEGATIVE FEEDBACK FOR BUYERS WOULD HELP THE STRIKE SYSTEM WORK... IT INSTILS CONFIDENCE IN MORE SELLERS TO MAKE USE OF THE SYSTEM.

IF THE RESULTS OF  RANDOM BREATH TESTING WAS NOT ADVERTISED AT ALL, NOR THE COURT CASES, THE FINES OR THE CONSEQUENCES ...WOULD RANDOM BREATH TESTING WORK AS WELL AS A DETERRENT IF NOBODY KNEW OR COULD VISUALLY SEE THE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PERPETRATOR?? IE THEY WERE HIDDEN

NOW THAT I HAVE CLEARED MY THROAT

carry on regardless

[viewmont1071]

hello old friend

http://community.ebay.com.au/topic/Selling/Sellers-Able-Leave/500153667?start=120#msg604998719

[viewmont1071]

this is the thread with the buyer that had 48 positve negatives recorded on their account but was able to buy from sellers that had their blocks set at more than 1 in 12 months

..... the thread is either an endictment that the magority of ebay sellers do not have confidence in the strike system and do not raise npb disputes but just issue pos/negs and just move on

or

an endictemnt that although most sellers open and close disputes  ebay remove strikesjust as quickly

take your pick

http://community.ebay.com.au/topic/Selling/Buyer-Serial-Offender/600156750?#msg505147443

from the OP

BAN THIS PERSON 48 negatives

I formed my "guess" on the balance of probability

ie..

that 48 sellers had left negative postitives and the probability that at least 2 opened NPB disputes is a little greater than the probability that 48 out of 48 did not

... I wondered how others formed their opinion???