FINALLY - I Think I Get The Message.

[cmcoins2000]

eBay do not want Sellers.

They only want Buyers.

[cmcoins2000]

---

@5kazam wrote:

From eBay Money Back Guarantee > Other Terms

• Maybe I'm reading this incorrectly, but if eBay makes a final decision in favour of the buyer, isn't it in fact then abrogating the seller's 'warranty/refund policy' on the item sold?  Actually taking over as the arbiter of the product - and making a sight unseen decision.

  And I definitely think seller's should watch out on point 2.  Recent posts about personal information being given to a notorious buyer!!  The release of contact information should be a breach of the Privacy Act, and does leave the door open for the not so nice in our society.

---

You got it.

Begs the question - are they going to totally ignore the Terms & Conditions of sale the likes of DS & TGGs have had prepared by their legal teams. (which have been very closely read)

Or are there a number of convenient 'User Agreements' one for us & one for them.

All the same - as said before - eBay as a 'platform' are insinuating themselves into the business of others by taking no responsibilty for items, listings, T&Cs,  they in fact have 'no interest' in the items but are intending to be 'Judge & Jury'.

Good luck with that.

[cmcoins2000]

---

@digital*ghost wrote:

---

@cmcoins2000 wrote:

---

@digital*ghost wrote:

The angle that I would be looking at this from is whether eBay can ask its sellers to comply with the terms - if they can, then they can't get into trouble for enforcing them, because by using the site once the policies are in force, a member has agreed to comply. In other words, is it ok for them to make it so that if you sell on eBay (which is voluntary), you have to be prepared to provide (let's just call them) consumer guarantees above and beyond what you would normally be required to offer. 

I don't know the answer to this question, but I think it's the most important one to ask at this stage.

---

From my experience with the law - if the law is being broken - no User Agreement, Contract or whatever is worth the paper it is written on.

---

To put it another way, retailers do not have to accept change of mind returns, they're not legally obliged to at all. But if they put a sign up saying "No questions asked return policy", then they are legally obliged to uphold that. Selling on eBay is now going to mean a bunch of signs are in your proverbial window, and because using eBay is voluntary, can it at all be deemed that the signs are accepted voluntarily just the same as in the retailer's change of mind sign? 

Would Westfield be able to say that any retailer wishing to hold space in one of their centres has to be able to offer change of mind returns?  i.e. How far can the conditions of use actually go? 

---

Really don't think so.

In these circumstances Westfield's only interest is in the 'Lease' of space with certain rules concerning the space.

Westfield in the first instance would know for what purpose the space was going to be leased.

They could not change the Terms & Conditions of the Lessee - not how their product is sold - unless there was something akin to damage to the space etc.

[5kazam]

re 'Good luck with that'.  None of it will affect me, thankfully.  I've done with selling on eBay.

I got bitten on the hand by a dog some time ago (and I wasn't feeding it).  It took a long time to heal.  I've no intention of being bitten on the hand again.

[digital*ghost]

---

@cmcoins2000 wrote:

---

To put it another way, retailers do not have to accept change of mind returns, they're not legally obliged to at all. But if they put a sign up saying "No questions asked return policy", then they are legally obliged to uphold that. Selling on eBay is now going to mean a bunch of signs are in your proverbial window, and because using eBay is voluntary, can it at all be deemed that the signs are accepted voluntarily just the same as in the retailer's change of mind sign? 

Would Westfield be able to say that any retailer wishing to hold space in one of their centres has to be able to offer change of mind returns?  i.e. How far can the conditions of use actually go? 

---

Really don't think so.

In these circumstances Westfield's only interest is in the 'Lease' of space with certain rules concerning the space.

Westfield in the first instance would know for what purpose the space was going to be leased.

They could not change the Terms & Conditions of the Lessee - not how their product is sold - unless there was something akin to damage to the space etc.

---

What I'm really trying to understand is whether or not there is something to dispute at a different level here on eBay and with their Money Back Guarantee T&Cs. I figure the best way to do that is not just by knowing what the legal rights and obligations of the seller may be, but what (I suppose in a nutshell) what eBay can get away with legally, or how. That is, rather than the "you can't make me" approach, but the "why do you think you can?" approach. 

[cmcoins2000]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
i dont know how they are making money at the moment

sales have virtually stopped over the last week and this has been my worst performing month for some time

---

Just had a scary thought.

Do you think that while we are sitting here 'chatting'.

eBay has turned off the lights & gone home.

Never known it so slowwww ever.

Reminds me of the old one about the number of Kiwis coming to OZ.

'Would the last one to leave - please turn out the lights'.

[5kazam]

DG wrote ...That is, rather than the "you can't make me" approach, but the "why do you think you can?" approach....

The 'why do you think you can?' approach appears to be covered in Other Terms point 1. 

• Buyers and sellers permit us to make final decisions about all cases, including appeals.

  Which obviously means all sellers who continue to list on eBay have agreed to that T&C - not only not a level playing field, but full of rocks and unseen deep holes where sellers can take a spill.

[ms_aussie]

Me too. I have no intention sticking around to let eBay slowly destroy my reputation and take my stock from me for gratis.

Ebay have given me Power Seller status and TRS status but that would mean nothing to them if they want to get rid of me. It's all p**s & wind and nothing else.

Ebay wants happy buyers and to hell with the sellers.

[cmcoins2000]

---

@digital*ghost wrote:

---

---

What I'm really trying to understand is whether or not there is something to dispute at a different level here on eBay and with their Money Back Guarantee T&Cs. I figure the best way to do that is not just by knowing what the legal rights and obligations of the seller may be, but what (I suppose in a nutshell) what eBay can get away with legally, or how. That is, rather than the "you can't make me" approach, but the "why do you think you can?" approach. 

---

Well, that is it in a nutshell isn't it.

'Why do you think you can' .

So far it remains to be tested - the policies have to be 'logical' as well as 'legal'.

And we all know they are neither.

Was interested in the Post yesterday of PayPal giving a buyer 10 days to return the item to the seller with tracking.

The question is even if the buyer posts the item on the 9th day - the seller at that time has not even received the item back in any sort of condition or at all  - PayPal can close the case.

This also begs the question as I said previously:

All parcels now have tracking.

A buyer packs & sends a parcel with tracking.

The tracking number - with no address - just the tracking number as asked for is supplied to PayPal.

It is shown to be a valid tracking number.

The address on the parcel could be Auntie's - from where the buyer can pick up 'a parcel' in their own good time.

Doesn't this seem a little skewed.

[digital*ghost]

---

@5kazam wrote:

DG wrote ...That is, rather than the "you can't make me" approach, but the "why do you think you can?" approach....

The 'why do you think you can?' approach appears to be covered in Other Terms point 1. 

• Buyers and sellers permit us to make final decisions about all cases, including appeals.

  Which obviously means all sellers who continue to list on eBay have agreed to that T&C - not only not a level playing field, but full of rocks and unseen deep holes where sellers can take a spill.

---

I'm actually interested in whether or not any of the Money Back Guarantee T&Cs really could be challenged legally, since there is generally a common agreement about the extent of legal obligations a seller may have and I understand most of them quite well, so I also understand the points others have raised about eBay's T&Cs compromising rights, but what I don't understand is on what basis these T&Cs have been introduced, and if/how they could be successfully challenged beyond that. 

In some ways, at the moment I interpret the whole thing a bit like "you don't have to if you don't want to, but if you list on eBay then by virtue you indicate that you want to, and we'll make you keep that word", so I just want to know if it's legit to impose it that way, and if it is, then knowing you don't have to doesn't amount to a great deal. But if it isn't, then knowing exactly why not is the best way to challenge them on it.

If that makes sense. 

[digital*ghost]

---

@cmcoins2000 wrote:

---

@digital*ghost wrote:

---

---

What I'm really trying to understand is whether or not there is something to dispute at a different level here on eBay and with their Money Back Guarantee T&Cs. I figure the best way to do that is not just by knowing what the legal rights and obligations of the seller may be, but what (I suppose in a nutshell) what eBay can get away with legally, or how. That is, rather than the "you can't make me" approach, but the "why do you think you can?" approach. 

---

Well, that is it in a nutshell isn't it.

'Why do you think you can' .

So far it remains to be tested - the policies have to be 'logical' as well as 'legal'.

And we all know they are neither.

Was interested in the Post yesterday of PayPal giving a buyer 10 days to return the item to the seller with tracking.

The question is even if the buyer posts the item on the 9th day - the seller at that time has not even received the item back in any sort of condition or at all  - PayPal can close the case.

This also begs the question as I said previously:

All parcels now have tracking.

A buyer packs & sends a parcel with tracking.

The tracking number - with no address - just the tracking number as asked for is supplied to PayPal.

It is shown to be a valid tracking number.

The address on the parcel could be Auntie's - from where the buyer can pick up 'a parcel' in their own good time.

Doesn't this seem a little skewed.

---

Yes, but a tracking number alone is not supposed to be acceptable proof of postage. 

And if PayPal do grant a buyer a refund in those kinds of circumstances, the decision could very easily be appealed / overturned. I know that's not ideal, but if PayPal want to be fools, more often than not, they can be made to do it with their own money.

eBay, on the other hand, are fools with everyone's money. 😞