eBay

clubcar · ‎13-08-2019

We are a Golf Cart business that operates a showroom and our own industry leading website. We advertise vehicles on our website, eBay as well as Facebook and sometimes even Instagram.

I recently advertised a Petrol golf cart which are very rare. We listed this item on eBay and received a few messages. The vehicle was on display in our showroom. We received a few messages from customers in regional areas asking about delivery costs to various areas. One customer sent a phone number (I did not ask for it or respond to their message). In the meantime, as often happends, a customer came in and bought it. So I ended the item on eBay as it was no longer available.

Now we are suspended from eBay for selling the item outside of eBay - when I queried this with eBay, they say, we were suspended from eBay because sharing contact details is not allowed - At no point did we share any details, at no point did we request any details. At no time did we reply to the customer who sent their details. When I asked how we can be responsible for what other people say, their arrogant response is simply "we understand but the decision is final". So now we are suspended because of something a customer did and may do again. Obviously it is impossible for us to be res

What is the best way to make a formal complaint against eBay? Is it worth contracting a solicitor? Anyone had any success on making a complaint through the ombudsman?

twyngwyn · ‎15-08-2019

It wouldn't be at all easy to prove that the sale didn't occur because of it being listed on ebay.
_________________________________________________________
stat dec from the buyer saying he had no previous knowledge?

collect247 · ‎15-08-2019

You're going over board here lol because it isn't about any fees or what not with OP it's the fact that OP was accused by ebay of something they didn't do and therefor suspending them from listing on ebay.

I'm positive (there's that word again that I know you love) that the OP would of been glad to pay any fees if in fact the sale did occur through ebay but it didn't so ebay have just decided a seller is again guilty until proven innocent,isn't it the other way around of course it is lol.

But ebay as always are guilty of jumping the gun so to speak.

People say that I'm an ebay employee lol but it looks pretty clear that you my dear rabbit are one also hahahahaha.

digital*ghost · ‎15-08-2019

@brerrabbit585 wrote:
The plaintiff (OP) would have to prove ebay's terms of their user agreement are illegal in order to prove that they were treated unfairly by not being given a chance to defend themselves, as the terms clearly state that ebay may charge fees if it sells outside ebay. Even if the OP sold the item through their shop, who's to say the person who bought it didn't originally see it on ebay and knowing who the seller was they decided to go and have a look at it? Or someone else may have seen it on ebay and told a friend, who told another friend, and eventually this person got to hear about it - all because of the ebay listing - and then it sold. It wouldn't be at all easy to prove that the sale didn't occur because of it being listed on ebay.

Sorry, but I think you're drawing a really long bow with that last example. The policy isn't in relation to sales that might occur elsewhere - with items that are also available elsewhere - because a buyer happened to see it on eBay at some point. It deals specifically with eBay losing out on FVF from sales that technically should have occurred on eBay. That's why ending an item triggers it, because now they won't get their contracted FVF from a sale that came about as a direct result of being available on eBay.

There's also a difference between a term of service being legal, and that same term of service being legally enforcable if challenged. I wish I had an Aussie example off the top of my head that I could use, but the first one I can think of is the TOS on US eBay that states members are not allowed to bring class action lawsuits against eBay, and that disputes with eBay have to be handled through arbitration. They of course also have the clause that by using the site, you agree with these terms - that one is 100% not legally enforceable.

If a case like this did actually go to court, I suspect much of it would be about whether ebay has reasonable grounds to apply the term on the basis of nothing but suspicion, and / or whether the term is actually legally enforceable (and I would honestly be surprised if it is).

lupercal · ‎15-08-2019

Nevermind - this got convoluted and I'm not sure of my own train of logic 🙂

I agree with your post 100%, though.

viewmont1071 · ‎16-08-2019

@brerrabbit585 wrote:
The plaintiff (OP) would have to prove ebay's terms of their user agreement are illegal in order to prove that they were treated unfairly by not being given a chance to defend themselves, as the terms clearly state that ebay may charge fees if it sells outside ebay. Even if the OP sold the item through their shop, who's to say the person who bought it didn't originally see it on ebay and knowing who the seller was they decided to go and have a look at it? Or someone else may have seen it on ebay and told a friend, who told another friend, and eventually this person got to hear about it - all because of the ebay listing - and then it sold. It wouldn't be at all easy to prove that the sale didn't occur because of it being listed on ebay.

Every B and M store that lists on ebay ie. everybody from Australia Post to Zagreb's zoological supplies has items listed that they also sell in their B and M stores. I am sure they don't charge Australia post a FVF for every product sold in their B and M store that is also listed on ebay......I wonder why?

TELL ME AND I WILL FORGET, SHOW ME AND I MAY REMEMBER,, INVOLVE ME AND I WILL UNDERSTAND Confucius 450bc