I fully believe I won't get payment on an item I just sold (not too far south of $200).
In the site preferences, I think this sums it up nicely, as an option:
Block bidders and buyers who have received 2 Unpaid Item strike(s) within 1 month(s)
This requirement can help you avoid bidders and buyers with a history of not paying for the items they have agreed to purchase.
If I had the option, I would block someone that has had 1 unpaid item strike in the last 3 months (the months are selectable between 1, 6, and 12.
It's damned annoying that there aren't harsher penalties for the buyers that bid on an item with the intention of actually paying for it, or changing their mind on whether they want the item or not.
I wonder how those sellers get on with time sensitive items, such as tickets? A non-paying bidder in that situation would mean the seller could potentially be singificantly out of pocket without any change of remediation.
Talk about inconvenience, especially this time of year! Waiting 4 days to open a dispute after no communication, then having to wait another 4 days for the outcome of that... Means you can't really relist for 8 days. If you list for 5 days, it means essentially 2 weeks lost for the seller. That's and extra 2 weeks whether they have to hold on to the tiem. If the item is an auction, it's very possible that you will end up with a lower bid than even the second bid amount on your original listing, so the seller is out of pocket.
Now, this time of year... Well not sure how effective trying to relist a product over Christmas would be, any ideas on this? It's extremely annoying for me because I am going away for 3 weeks, and now have to pack the item to take with me, in case they decide to pay for it after getting a dispute opened. Of course, I want to relist it as well, so I would have to take it with me.
I just find it unfair that people think they can do this without the risk of penalty. I think a resolution for this is requiring every buyer to have a Paypal account (yes I know some people will dispute that, but there's a good reason).The main issue seems to be with auctions, particularly those of over what, $15?. Therefore, if they bid on an item of over $15, they should have to pay a retainer fee for the privilege to do so. Since they are a low volume user they wouldn't be buying so many things to cost them a fortune in retainers. Now, if their bid is exceeded, that $15 is free'd to be used for bidding on other items, or they can rebid at a higher amount (which then takes that retainer. The retainer can stay on their account until such time or volume of honoured bids that it is considered 'no longer necessary', where they can withdraw it. If the person wins a bid, they can choose to use the retainer to reduce the final sale price upon paying (by Paypal).
Here's the important part.
If they fail to pay, they lose their retainer.
Only when there is a real monetary threat will these non-payers actually pay up! Of course, the retainer fee can also apply in other scenarios too, such as a once-honest person failing to pay and so on. If a person who is typically good as a non-pay strike against them in the last 3 months, they should be required to use the retainer as well, and limit bidding to say, on 4 items (so $60 worth of retainers).
This might sound a bit full on, but I do see it as a workable solution to the non-payment issue. The retainer (or at least, the majority) should go to the seller of the item for the inconvenience casued by these selfish non-payers.
