Buyers should NOT be allowed to leave ANY feedback after being refunded in full in reasonable time

[lasernode]

Jebus I tell you what, where is my seller protection??? I've had a number of dippers recently who buy items, then read the description and find out it's not what they want, then request a refund, so I do the refund, and then the dipper HAS THE OPTION OF LEAVING NEGATIVE FEEDBACK??? For f's sake come-on, this is a joke... Anyone refunded within a reasonable time should not be able to wreck a seller's reputation. I try hard to maintain a 100% feedback but realisitically, I realise this may be simply impossible over time due to ebay allowing negative feedback to be left for a seller after a buyer is refunded. Yea, yea, i know the ebay chant, "the buyer leaves feedback to reflect their opinion of the transaction", but in all my cases, the buyer has requested a refund via ebay message and saying they bought the wrong item... now before anyone says I should describe items clearly, I have BIG TEXT on the main pictures, and also in THE VERY FIRST LINE OF THE DESCRIPTION and also in the item specifics stating "Procuct type:this type(for example a service, files, whatever)" that clearly says what is on offer and I have done this to try to stop these types of purchases happening but it's a fact of lift that there is a percentage of idiots out there who buy and then read about what they bought(or even better, i have had a number of buyers who have NEVER READ THE DESCRIPTION.... can you believe this???).

So I have done my best to make it clear what's on offer for my items, and then some dipper comes along, buys it, then realises they bought the wrong thing, requests a refund, so I refund them in full within a short time, and they can then leave me negative feedback???

THIS SHOULD SIMPLY NOT BE ABLE TO HAPPEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[lasernode]

digital*ghost:

I know some of the things you mentioned, and I admit you make reasoned arguments, but I still can't see how it is "fair" to a seller who has done nothing wrong, to receive neg FB for a transaction that the buyer themselves wanted to back-out of.

TO EVERYONE READING THIS:

Since probably most buyers look at a seller's FB before buying, don't you think that a seller who has received neg FB through no fault of their own, is being unfairly penalised? (and also gains an undeserved reputation due to having neg FB).

Since so much emphasis when buying or selling is placed on FB, it should at least be fair FB (as far as possible) I think.

Also, I have come across a number of dipper buyers (and more than one has tried to scam me) who I would have gladly left neg FB, to warn others of, yet as a seller, it's impossible now. I know you used to be able to do it, and I think it's a mistake that it was removed. Just as there as dodgey sellers, there are at least as many dodgey buyers, that's been my experience.

I think the whole FB needs a complete re-think and overhaul, and taken out of the hands of actual buyers and sellers, and FB I think can be determined logically and automatically by looking at the outcome after a transaction.

----------------------------------------------------

Like this:

----------------------------------------------------

A case IS NEVER opened against the seller for a particular transaction: (within a pre-set time limit)

If a buyer buyer buys something and never opens a case for "not received" or "not as described" etc, it pretty much must be concluded (by any reasonable person) that the transaction was positive, and therefore the seller should get a pos FB from eBay automatically (probably comment-less) after some timeout period has expired (like after opening a case is no longer possible, what is it, 60 days?).

----------------------------------------------------

A case IS opened against the seller for a particular transaction: (within a pre-set time limit)

If a buyer does open a case that is resolved in the buyer's favor, and as long as the case is due to a seller fault, then the seller should get a neg FB from eBay automatically (maybe with a stored standard comment as to the reason for the fault).

Now, "not as described" would be considered a seller fault only if the seller does not agree to the item being returned and the buyer refunded in full within a pre-determined (by eBay) time limit. Now if a seller racked up enough of these "not as described" faults, it should escalate from a set number of rising warnings to being eventually banned.

Now, "not recieved" would be considered a seller fault only if tracking cannot prove otherwise (eg lost in post is not a seller fault if tracking can prove it was actually sent (ie: scanned in by eg: Australia Post) but never arrived)

----------------------------------------------------

This system I came up with I think is the fairest way to make FB an actual real representation of transaction defects, rather than relying on any buyer's personal opinions, which is so open to errors, personal judgments etc it's not funny. I think this system would be best for all concerned, buyers, and importantly, sellers, and it would be a FB rating you could take as a serious and accurate assesment of a seller's performance.

What do you people's think of my FB system? Maybe it needs some ironing out, I haven't thought too deeply about it, but it seems the best way for FB to me. Yea, even if you people's agree with me, what's the actual chances it would be implented... yea, that's what I was thinking too... That's the prob with eBay, good idea's for improvement either never happen, or take eons until they are implemented... (oh as a side note, how many other people are p**sed off at the amount of god-d*mn programming errors on eBay? Jebus christ eBay hire at least half-bl**dy decent programmers for f's sake, every item edit I do I have to double check as some many JS (JavaScript) errors it's beyond the point of lazy coding, it's just frn plain and simple incompetence!!!)

[lasernode]

TO: imastawka

Oh I forgot to mention, ok so you wouldn't send your equipment to a registered Australian business to do something that no-one outside of the manufacturer can do? And yes, we are the world-first and currently still the only company outside of the manufacturer in the USA who can perform the service we provide.

Ok here's the situation that people with the device (that we service) face, in point order:
1. You buy a device that costs close to $1000 (a device that's used on your car).
2. You use the device once on your car (to load one file into your car's computer).
3. The device is now un-usable and pretty much worthless (as it is now locked to your exact car by your car's unique-in-the-world VIN number).
4. if you are willing to send it back to the manufacturer in USA and pay the postage costs there and back and also pay a $250 USD fee to unlock the device to reset it back to as it was when you bought it (and that's IF the manufacturer agrees to reset it, they push hard into trying to sell you a new device which basically does the same thing), go back to point 1 and start over again.

So you see the reason people send them to us.

And yes, we need the actual physical device to perform our service, just as the manufacturer does.

So, you can either trust us and send it in, or you can keep it as a paper-weight if your not willing to do the USA thing just mentioned.

And FYI, we are not some backyard amatuers, we are a registered Australian business with an ABN, and we are licenced and trade-qualified, and combined we have over 25 years industry experience and IAME (Institute of Automotive Mechanical Engineers Australia) membership. And we have successfully performed this service count-less times with a 100% success rate. So your not sending your device to some joe-blow.

Also in regard to the other comment about refunds for performing this service:

if you worked for a day, and a buyer said "I want a refund" afterwards and due to this, you don't get paid for your day's labour, would you still offer refunds? I wouldn't think so...

TO: imastawka

Also in regard to your comment, is it still as a case of: " I'm blowed if I would send my equipment to a seller to load up and then trust that I'll get it back. Not happenin' - Nuh Uh";

Once again, I wouldn't think so...

Look, I'm not trying to sound mean or put you down etc, it's just you need to have an understanding of the situation first before making an outright denial like that...

[springyzone]

I can see some merit in some of your suggestions and I can particularly imagine how maddening it would be to get an unfair neg after refunding a buyer who simply changed their mind.

It's tempting to say that the opportunity to give feedback should be removed from any buyer who requests a cancellation.

I think your 'not as described' scenario would need some fine tuning though.

Now, "not as described" would be considered a seller fault only if the seller does not agree to the item being returned and the buyer refunded in full within a pre-determined (by eBay) time limit. Now if a seller racked up enough of these "not as described" faults, it should escalate from a set number of rising warnings to being eventually banned.

I think the problem with this is it can be a murky area. Buyers can too easily win this. I know sometimes items really are not as described but all the same, a seller should not automatically have to agree to a return just on the buyer say so.

I recently bought some 3mm double sided tape off a seller. I saw they had a neg for this tape. You know what it said?

This tape is not even 1cm wide! And it doesn't stick either."

The tape I ordered arrived quickly, it was 3mm wide and stuck perfectly. Yet that poor seller had to wear a neg because of some drongo who obviously doesn't understand what 3mm wide means. I bet ebay would let that feedback stand though because of the bit about it not sticking-which was totally untrue.

If that buyer had made a not as described claim though, they may have won it on the 'doesn't stick' complaint.

The feedback system needs a shake up, it probably does need to go to a more automated system, there does need to be some way to auto list buyer strikes as well (though ebay would not be keen on that). I think it is only a matter of time before it is sidelined. It used to be important as it was the only security you had as a buyer, so seeing if someone had a good track record was important. These days with paypal etc it is still important but not as critically so.

[imastawka]

I have such a device in my car, I'm informed by 'he who knows about the car'

We paid a fortune for the car, and I think it will outlive us, so I don't need to

send the thingie to you or anyone else.  

Even if we were selling the car, I still wouldn't do it.  It's only music

and can be replaced.

A franchise of LJ Hooker, a respected Real Estate Agency has

just been outed as thieves, keeping clients monies, so we've all

got to be on our toes,  trusted business or not.

I know you have to defend yourself, it's natural

I'm just sayin'  -  from my perspective

[padi*0409]

Talkin' of music Stalks..............here's cat music................

                       

[imastawka]

Spoiler

 

[digital*ghost]

---

@lasernode wrote:

Now, "not recieved" would be considered a seller fault only if tracking cannot prove otherwise (eg lost in post is not a seller fault if tracking can prove it was actually sent (ie: scanned in by eg: Australia Post) but never arrived)

----------------------------------------------------

What do you people's think of my FB system? Maybe it needs some ironing out, I haven't thought too deeply about it, but it seems the best way for FB to me. 

---

Why do you want to hurt me?  

Seriously though, not all items have tracking - 95% of mine don't, and not even all parcels have tracking (despite what AP say), some sellers are on contract rates and tracking isn't included as standard. 

Suggestions like automated feedback ignore the fact that sometimes a buyer is not really satisfied with their purchase but doesn't do anything about it. Also, presuming that personal (i.e. subjective) opinion has no place is also problematic. I like the fact that a buyer neg no longer gives me a "defect". Sure, it's there, and other buyer's can read it, but it doesn't jeopardise my account unfairly so really, all it does is show that a couple of buyers weren't 100% satisfied, for whatever reason, and I've gotten to the point where I just think, so be it. 

I honestly think you're placing too much emphasis on feedback, and the potential effects of a negative. The reality is the vast majority of buyers don't look at FB, and if they do they can usually spot unreasonable, unfair or downright ridiculous ones, not to mention that a well-worded reply to a neg will often mitigate it for them. A neg with a good reply can actually encourage purchase (I did in fact want to buy from a seller who had replied to a neg calling them a scammer and a theif with "driving to the airport in my porsche with your $2 now", I thought that was a great reply, though wouldn't necessarily recommend a reply that glib or sarcastic, but it's a prime example of how a negative feedback will reflect well on the seller and poorly on the buyer, rather than the other way around).

I also think the emphasis placed on feedback by some sellers is to every seller's detriment. I personally think that the second sellers started to fear them was the second they became a bargaining chip, something to wield over a seller. I prefer not to give a buyer who would do something like that, that kind of power.

People don't always say something nice about others, about business etc, and it's not nice, it can be harsh, and it can be unfair (especially if taken personally), but it's not going to ruin your business, so if you shift your focus from seeing it as a failure of the system to just part of the system and move on with focusing your energies on the business, you'll be a lot happier IMO.  

[springyzone]

People don't always say something nice about others, about business etc, and it's not nice, it can be harsh, and it can be unfair (especially if taken personally), but it's not going to ruin your business, so if you shift your focus from seeing it as a failure of the system to just part of the system and move on with focusing your energies on the business, you'll be a lot happier IMO.  

I know this is a bit off topic but I was just thinking, if you consider some of the neg feedback on ebay unfair, you don't ever want to be a teacher. At least on ebay you know who has given you the neg and you can reply and you can contest the online content and in some cases have it removed. You can even block the person from your life.

I know of a site where anonymous people can go in and write whatever they like about teachers and it stands, no matter how unfair or untrue. I was in teaching and saw some rubbish written about a couple of my friends and even the prin.

[lasernode]

springyzone:

yea i can see how it might not be that simple, but still it should be do-able (to automate feedback) based on the transaction outcome, i think.

and actually, you raise a good point i didn't consider re the FB, that is, why not remove it completely? since both ebay and paypal offer money-back protections to buyers, why even have FB? right now, ebay policy is if a seller has enough defects it eventually leads to being banned or restricted etc... if a seller has a high enough percentage of cases within say a month, just lead that to warnings to an eventual ban? it should be do-able, and also all this stuff needs to be able to be manually over-ridden by ebay support in case of errors etc... FB is probably only important when there is no other protections?

[lasernode]

imastawka

i think you're mis-understanding what the device is, it's not a music player as you mention... lol it's a device which loads custom-written vehicle computer PCM (Powertrain Control Module) tuning files (tune as in a vehicle computer tuning file which controls how the engine etc works, not tune as in a music tune lol)... so with that in mind, go back to the steps and still see if you wouldn't send it in... when you use this device (which is a specific device to load PCM tuning files into a vehicle's PCM (engine control) computer it becomes internally locked and un-usable when used once to load on of these files and if you just paid close to $1000 for this device, it's now a paper-weight... but can be unlocked (reset) by us to again be useable...

so if you used the device, it becomes locked and un-usable, so what would you have to lose by sending it to us? lets say you sent it in and never recieved it back (by the way this has never and will never happen with us), what have you lost? nothing as you would have never been able to use it anyway since it was locked... so if you didn't send it in, you and also anyone else could never use it again until it was unlocked, so it has become worthless, it becomes basically an expensive paper-weight...

as an example of what i'm talking about, say you had a iphone that had a password lock that needed to be entered to turn it on, and you and no-one else knew the password, so you could never use the phone, but there was a company that if you sent it in, and paid a small fee compared to what a new iphone cost, to unlock it, would you send it in? probably huh? and if you wouldn't well good luck with that and with your locked iphone, you can use it as a doorstop... lol...

anyway, that's my opinion, and also many many people obviously have a different opinion to you of our unlock service as we have performed well over 100 of this particular service (we advertise our services both on and off eBay) by people sending them in to us...