Seller non-Protection

[kar1139]

So here's a scam that Ebay fully supports. Buyer purchases popular, expensive item. Just before money back guarantee closes he says 'item not as described'. Sends something back with tracking no. to some random Post Office Box that is reasonably close by (could be empty box for all I know). Seller never receives item but it has been tracked and collected by random PO Box owner who doesn't need to show ID to collect it. Post Office doesn't keep record of addresses. EBay says it's been shown to be delivered so refunds money to buyer. So Seller has no item, no money and Ebay insists case is closed.

[lyndal1838]

If the dispute is through ebay they have to return it to the address that ebay gives them....with tracking.

If you do not receive it, or it is not your address (and can be tracked to a different address) ring ebay and tell them.  They should not refund the buyer without the item in your possession.

Appeal the current situation......and keep appealing until you get satisfaction.

[*bellee*]

I think the OP is suggesting the scammer sent the item to a random address with the same postcode. Because Australia Post only shows the suburb in the tracking, and Ebay deems this sufficient proof, the scammer might get away with it.

For expensive items though, a signature on the delivery should be required.

[lyndal1838]

But the OP seems to know what address the item was sent to.

If they know, why doesn't ebay know?   Someone (AP?) must know where it went so why can't ebay be told it was sent to the wrong address if it can be proved.

I always thought a ebay dispute demanded proof of delivery as opposed to the paypal dispute only needing proof of posting.

[justkidzbiz]

eBay need to seriously look at the process for returns. There needs to be some kind of evidence that the correct item is returned, to the correct address.

They tell you that as a Sller you have protection but in reality you don't. A buyer can send back whatever they like - including an empty box, and get their money back plus keep the item. It's quite outrageous. I got duped from one buyer who claimed SNAD, sent me back a different item and eBay despite me telling them on the phone several times, "but the buyer didn't and my item back, they sent an old worn item", eBay still sided with the buyer stating "well, the buyer sent back "an item" we have to refund their money" 

they E wonder why people aren't selling as much as they used to!

[lyndal1838]

I could not agree more....I am not a seller but even blind Freddie can see that sellers are getting a raw deal with this MBG.

I recently had an ebay survey asking my opinion on ebay introducing a free returns system for any reason at all.  Despite it being good for me as a buyer I made my feelings known very clearly.  It absolutely stinks in my opinion.

[collect247]

As soon as the MBG came into play my game was over.

I had 15 buyers put in their claim for MBG within 2 weeks and ebay obliged those buyers.

I argued that yes maybe 1 or 2 but 15 in a row C'MON.

I argued that this looks very scamming on the buyers behalf but tough **bleep** to me.

Years of hard work gone in a month 

[*tippy*toes*]

The infuriating thing is, if that happened to you now, you'd still be able to sell. So many good sellers were lost during that defect scam and now that it's no longer in play, scam sellers are coming along and getting away with it, while they continue to sell with impunity. All the while, the decent sellers were shafted because of the MBG scam.

[digital*ghost]

This would be classed as sheer laziness on eBay's behalf if it wasn't so negligent. They actually do the same thing with INR cases, so only require a tracking number that shows delivery within X km of the address. But, at least buyers still have recourse via PayPal or their card provider.

Why they do not verify delivery addresses in either instance is beyond comprehension, and honestly should be investigated.

[designers*n*more]

Totally agree.

Then there's the scamming buyers. There was a lady just recently who sold 2 genuine Hermes cutlery sets to buyer in the USA. The scammer lodged a dispute that the sets were fake, the seller stated she purchased them personally from Hermes Paris a few years back but didn't have the original receipt. (Who keeps receipts for 8 years? Can you imagine the stock pile of paper?)

Buyer got some third party bs authentication that they were fake. So eBay refunds $1400 for one set and the other set which was about $700, the seller actually won the dispute.  Buyer gets to keep $1400 set plus gets their money back without the need to return the item. That in itself is just plain wrong!

Seller queries the authentication and eBay REFUSES to provide her with a copy sighting it's confidential due to privacy laws. That is just bs.

Major flaws all round for sellers regarding MBG.