Frist ever for not as described item

[*sparklz*]

Long story short here.

With over 5000 sales I have NEVER had to deal with an item not as described dispute.

Buyer put in offer, offer accepted paid and posted.

Buy starts to ask questions after item is posted and realises she has purchased the wrong size item.

Description was 100% accurate re the item and size.

Buyer not in the know assumed she was getting bigger version.

Buyer then opens dispute for item not received less than 24 hrs after paying.

I call PP and tell them the item was paid for less than 24 hours ago.

PP say just wait and see what happens.

Next day buyer changes dispute to not as described.

Tracking shows the item is still in transit and not even delivered.

Call to PP again, they close the dispute and release money back to PP account.

2 days later buyer opens another not as described dispute saying item is not new as per description.

I supply all the proof possible to show it is exactly as described along with the history of the buyers disputes after a change of mind.

Paypal tell buyer to return to seller on the 27/9 for refund by the  by 8th Oct

Today the final day buyer enters tracking number for return of item.

So what happens if

a) the item is exactly as described and the buyer was using any excuse to get the refund (which is the case) as the item is as described.

or

b) they have damaged or used the item in the 10 days it was in their possession before returning it.

What proof would I need to send PP to win this dispute.

The buyer has sent abusive and profanity filed language via the ebay messages (which have been reported)

I can not understand how after opening 2 disputes BEFORE they even had the item that PP would even find in her favor when it was obviously a change of mind or buyers remorse.

[1sweetap6v8]

 @tall_bearded  OK here we go again, Tall how many times have you been in a civil court in fact how many times have any of you, how many of you have engaged a lawyer or barrister for  civil court proceeding.

Well I have on many many occasions , I even go and just sit in the gallery just to hear certain cases. You can go on line and look who is going up each day its public record. All courts list there daily proceedings online now. In cites that is.

Now you can sprout all the consumer laws you damn well like for what ever law you quote theres another one that will say differently or your barrister which you will have to have if it finally goes to court will interparate in in a different manner, because its just not as simple as ill take you to court it does not work that way, there is a whole process of negotiation that must take place before the hearing commences and most are settled prior to a judges decision the judge makes it very clear someone isnt going to  like his decision and its in both parties interests to come to an agreement, and you will need a barrister and a lawyer in most cases which is seriously expensive.

Unless you choose the small claims court . which is a horrible process.

The whole idea and process of the civil court is to deter people from being there at all they do not want to be dealing with petty rubbish.

But in the event that it does make a hearing due to both parties not being able to come to an agreement your laws will mean absolutly didly squat. The judge will not want to hear quoted laws he will make that very clear.

In a civil case the final judgement is his no matter what the law says, it is his own discression that determains the out come and i can tell you right now they frown apon any business who will not be seen to do the right thing no matter what laws you throw at them.

Its his decision based on what he will hear not the laws you think your coverd buy.

I am very aware what takes place in a civil court, I recomend all you,s who a rambling it says this and that to go to your local court house and watch a few civil cases most are big business and land disputes and believe it or not a lot of family disputes regarding estates that make it to a judge little petty stuff under 100,000 rarely makes it to hearing. Most cases that make it to hearing are hundreds of thousands and millions.

I recommend you all for your own sake take some time to vist your court house and i garrentee it opens your eyes and will change your thinking. And it is extreamly fascinating.

Honestly your laws your all pulling out hoping its your saviour may not be so it may actually be your demise.

As business people its in your interests to understand what will take place in the event you find yourself in such a place.

And small claims courts are a mess, the laws there are designed to deter you from using it. And almost always ends up with neither party a winner.

Dont take my word for it speak to a lawyer and vist your court house , look up the listings and go sit in the gallery and watch its just amazing. 

Now criminal courts LOL now thats where you get to use the law to your advantage not in civil or small claims. civil and small claims are designed on each individuals circumstances at the judges discresion not law.

My advice is to stay well away from a civil court i garrentee you wont like the cost or the process and probably not the out come.

Buy the way in civil cases you genrally need two official representives, your lawyer who will convey your case to the judge and a barrister who says nothing at all to the judge. he will sit in front of you and your lawyer with his back to the judge and give instructions only to your lawyer. its a nasty process and very very expensive.

And if you choose to represent yourself thats a garrentee to loose. A judge will never see your case over a proffessional lawyer or barrister.

[alanawent3133]

You can't even spell check your drivel

you have no credibility it sound's like you are bored and between jobs

[tall_bearded]

I won’t bother responding to most of what you have you have written. excepting to say, before I retired I was a professional advocate, with more court time than hot breakfasts. That is standing in real courts and/or tribunals and arguing real cases, and all of which, excepting for fraud cases. being in courts and tribunals of civil jurisdiction.

As for the list you referred me too, its correct name is the “Cause List” and I know it well.  I know it well because the first thing my assistant used to do each day was validate it against our Corporate Disputes Diary, to ensure that all of our cases listed for that day had representation allocated either by myself or one of my subordinate advocates or a solicitor from our legal panel, and if a solicitor was involved, and is the matter was listed for a hearing, that I, or one or my subordinate advocates would be available to issue instructions.

As for the process of civil litigation, it commences with the Lodgement of the Application, which is then followed by Conciliation/Mediation, and if it doesn’t resolve during the conciliation/mediation phase, it then goes to a hearing on the facts.  Then, if I didn’t like the outcome, I would authorise an appeal to court of higher jurisdiction, up to, and sometimes including and appeal to the Full Court of the Supreme Court.  I left the High Court out because we never had case that needed to go that high.

Finally a for in civil matters the judge being free to make his/her decision on what he/she believes is the best outcome without reference to precedent, had that happen to me once,  and only once.  In that instance a review officer decided he didn’t like the outcome when precedent was applied, so he simply decided to ignore the rule of precedent, and then was foolish enough to say so in his decision.  Outcome of the resultant appeal, a two paragraph judgement in which review officer was told exactly where he could stick his opinion about being able to ignore precedent, with the matter then being remitted for back for rehearing before a different review officer.  Then 6 months later he was looking for work in private practice.

Now I could go on, but enough is enough.  You obviously have a firm belief as to how you think the process works and nothing I say or do will shift you from that belief.  Therefore, as the question which the OP asked has now been more than comprehensively debated, I think is time, for everyone to decide whose opinion they prefer.

[davewil1964]

It's the BARRISTER who talks to the judge. I believe tb was involved in the law. Officially, not just from sitting in the gallery and making assumptions.

[tall_bearded]

Yep that how it works. 

You have the client.  Then you have the solicitor, who does the groundwork, prepares and lodges the paperwork and prepares the case, and then, when it’s listed for hearing it’s referred to Council (Barrister)  who actually argues the case..

However in some jurisdictions, such as say the Workers Compensation Tribunal, representation by advocates from employer bodies, industrial associations and unions is not uncommon.  Then of course there are the various small claims courts/tribunals which are lawyer free zones.  That is the expectation is the parties will be self represented.    

[phorum_junkie*]

i did not want to be rude nasty violent disrespectful  towards the opposite sex for the sake of respect honour and loyalty i have for the opposite sex.

Thank you for proving my point, obviously you would be happy to be rude nasty violent disrespectful  towards your own sex so by treating me any differently you are discriminating.

[1sweetap6v8]

Thank you all I have been banned for the last week and have been warned i will be permantly banned if i participate any further. No further comment .

[kayza40]

Yes that happens when you don't agree with everyone and dare to have a different opinion.  It's called a pink slap. 

[tall_bearded]

So was I, but I won’t be muzzled.

So for those who insist that Consumer protection legislation doesn’t apply, and refer to the Smythe as that airplane case is a one here is an extract of Kariyawasam, Kanchana; Guy, Scott --- "The Contractual Legalities of Buying and Selling on  eBay : Online Auctions and the Protection of Consumers" [2008] JlLawInfoSci 4; (2008) 19  as rteported in...

  The above decisions produced a variety of results for consumers. However, the legal uncertainty pertaining to  eBay  auction processes in Australia has been resolved by the recent well known case of Peter Smythe v Th...[95] the ‘1946 World War II Wirraway Plane’ decision in which the plaintiff, Peter Smythe, sued the ... eBay  by refusing to hand over the plane, a 1946 Wirraway.[96] The plane — one of only five in the world still flying — was put up for sale on  eBay  by Dr Thomas in August. Dr Thomas listed the aircraft on  eBay  with an auction period of ten days and a reserve of $150 000. At the end of the auction period,  eBay  informed both Smythe and Thomas that Mr Smythe had ‘won’ the aircraft. There were no other bidders....[97] Mr Smythe was the only person to bid, matching the reserve price with just 20 seconds to go bef...

The court ordered Thomas to complete the sale even though he had changed his mind about selling the 1946 World War II Wirraway plane under the terms on which he had placed it on the internet auction site. This time, the seller had apparently worked out a separate deal to sell the plane outside of  eBay  for a more profitable price. The plaintiff purchaser, who eventually succeeded in the action, deman...[98] Crucially, the court examined the  eBay  Rules, especially Clause 5.2, which stated that ‘if you receive at least one bid at or above your s...[99] This case clearly demonstrates that an online auction is completed when a nominated deadline ha... eBay  rules.[100]

This case removed some of the uncertainty relating to applicable law in Australia and ruled that an  eBay  sale essentially constitutes an auction and, therefore, a sale of goods. Specifically, the Wirraway... eBay  — in Australia and confirms that transactions thus made via  eBay  constitute legally binding and enforceable contracts. Hence, the decision in this case reinforces t... eBay  . The case is undoubtedly a welcome one since it will enhance consumer confidence in the sales proc... eBay  and ensure henceforth that vendors and purchasers will be legally bound by their respective offers ... eBay  sale is a sale and a bid on  eBay  is binding and legally enforceable: ‘It follows that, in my view, a binding contract was formed bet...[101] The judge concluded that ‘an online auction created a contract in the same way as a traditiona... eBay  auction’.[102]

This decision may, indeed, have international ramifications for consumers on the  eBay  online auction site. Bidders repudiating their bids or simply presenting bids which are purely vexa... eBay  . The court in this decision clearly held such bids to be offers, which created in the vendor the p... eBay  or any online auction site, especially in Australia, because it constitutes a legally binding contr...

The court also intimated that  eBay  was, in effect, an agent for the vendor and therefore had to monitor and superintend the conduct of... eBay  or other online auction processes are auctions per se.

However, this case sets an important precedent for buyers and sellers engaging in the formation of online contracts.[103] The authors are in favour of this decision, as it clearly states that online contracts are lik... eBay  . Traditional contract laws were created before internet shopping and online commerce were contempl...[104] More extensive consideration of this issue is beyond the scope of the current research; howeve...

[davewil1964]

 warned i will be permantly banned if i participate any further. No further comment .

You can participate all you want. As long as you play the ball not the member.