Should sellers be able to leave negative feedback for non-payments?

[2011emc2]

As a first-time seller, I had a buyer who didn't pay and didn't bother to contact me or respond to my emails. I opened an ‘Unpaid Item’ case, which again got no response, and closed the case today.

Yet the only feedback option available to me was to leave 'Positive' feedback for this buyer.

Really, eBay???

This 'buyer' still has a '100% positive' feedback rating on eBay. How is this honest or fair? Shouldn't a feedback system allow members of a community to comment on their actual dealings with people in that community?

Little wonder some sellers try to sneak in negative comments using the positive feedback option, to try to warn other unsuspecting sellers. Yet eBay deletes these from buyers' profiles.

I think eBay should change its feedback policy in order to allow equal footing for buyers and sellers. So sellers would be allowed to either: (a) leave negative feedback - if only for non-payment; or (b) automaticallly note non-payments into each buyer's feedback profile, so these are clear for all to see.

It's not a problem to demonstrate that a buyer hasn't paid. Why not give sellers the same rights as buyers to leave honest feedback? Wouldn't everyone benefit?

I didn't ship the item because payment never arrived or cleared.  Still, what a negative experience, especially the shocking attitude toward sellers whose fees sustain and enrich eBay.

What is your opinion on eBay's feedback policy for sellers?

(Newbies: FB = feedback, NP = non-payment)

[digital*ghost]

If you only want 'yes' or 'no' answers, you're posing the questions to the wrong person. Or maybe it's just a case of the wrong person choosing to respond  😛 I'll keep it short, though.

I already acknowledged that a visual record of non-payment would motivate some sellers who do not currently use the UPI dispute option to do so. I would suggest that apart from feeling some kind of moral obligation to "alert the eBay community", some sellers leave pos-negs for self-satisfaction, and that's what a visual record is conducive to, at least in part.

Some who leave positive negatives aren't aware they're committing a policy breach, thus I'm afraid I find the second question unanswerable in short. It seems like you're suggesting that sellers who are happy to knowingly breach policy probably only breach that one policy, and if they didn't feel compelled to breach that one anymore, they wouldn't breach any?

I said not having a visual record of non-payment was one of the ways eBay chose to maintain buyer confidence. Their decision was a business decision. I never suggested restricting a seller's account for breach of that policy promotes buyer confidence, but I wouldn't say it hurts it, either.

Why is it that the members poll numbers appeared skewed towards the bottom two options???

Because 12 people voted for option 1, 31 people voted for option 2, and 23 people voted for option 3.

Oh, and people who want to be able to leave negs for buyers are more likely to find threads and polls like this appealing, and subsequently more likely to participate/cast a vote.

[harzeeent]

Hi

I am one of the people who have started a similar thread ages ago and here is the same problem with the same arguments going round and round again. With a lot of the same forum members saying the same one eyed support of current ebay policy (hi phorum junkie)

This is obviously a problem that ebay should do something about. If these threads keep appearing then its still a problem. If ebay don't bother to read these letters then it's to their detriment as more and more on line sales sites appear.

There should be some way to mark NPB, how sellers coose to use this information is up to them. Currently there is no choice because there is no information on NPB.

No one is saying they want to hang NPB but we as sellers, no matter how big or small, want some way of recognising these people. All we want to see is a fair feedback system. It's not a witch hunt we are just asking to see a fair feedback system where honest feedback can be left, rather than dodging the rules leaving negative positives.

2011emc2 you have done the right thing starting this thread. It seems to be the vocal minority that want to keep the current system. The poll cearly shows sellers want a change. How ebay choose to set up this system will determine wether sellers stay with them or go elsewhere.Buyers are important but without sellers there will be nothing for them to buy. It's their choice, it's their site

[davewil1964]

There should be some way to mark NPB, how sellers coose to use this information is up to them. Currently there is no choice because there is no information on NPB.

As has been stated on numerous occasions, if the seller goes through the correct process, then the buyer gets a strike. Prudent sellers set blocks for buyers with 2 or more strikes.

I sell books. Approximately 22,000 out of 9,000,000 listings are auction. The sellers of BIN items (the vast majority) have no means of checking feedback before selling, nor do those with auctions that are sniped in the last few seconds.

All a seller can do it require instant payment, which knocks out every payment option except Paypal, fully funded. No bank deposits, no eCheques, no pickup if the buyer is local, no combining postage, unless you muck around doing partial refunds, less buyer satisfaction, I'll warrant.

Or you can click a few buttons, set your blocks, including manually for the NPB, and move on.

[happyshopping20091118]

Hello.I think the best way is to ignore this kind of buyer!

🙂

[viewmont1071]

If you only want 'yes' or 'no' answers, you're posing the questions to the wrong person. Or maybe it's just a case of the wrong person choosing to respond  😛 I'll keep it short, though.

I already acknowledged that a visual record of non-payment would motivate some sellers who do not currently use the UPI dispute option to do so. I would suggest that apart from feeling some kind of moral obligation to "alert the eBay community", some sellers leave pos-negs for self-satisfaction, and that's what a visual record is conducive to, at least in part.

Some who leave positive negatives aren't aware they're committing a policy breach, thus I'm afraid I find the second question unanswerable in short. It seems like you're suggesting that sellers who are happy to knowingly breach policy probably only breach that one policy, and if they didn't feel compelled to breach that one anymore, they wouldn't breach any?

I said not having a visual record of non-payment was one of the ways eBay chose to maintain buyer confidence. Their decision was a business decision. I never suggested restricting a seller's account for breach of that policy promotes buyer confidence, but I wouldn't say it hurts it, either.

Why is it that the members poll numbers appeared skewed towards the bottom two options???

Because 12 people voted for option 1, 31 people voted for option 2, and 23 people voted for option 3.

Oh, and people who want to be able to leave negs for buyers are more likely to find threads and polls like this appealing, and subsequently more likely to participate/cast a vote.

Why do you separate buyers and sellers in your posts rather than  using the word member given that many members are both buyers and sellers?

Buyers and sellers are retail words and the use in the context of feedback I believe is divisive........... A true community has members. For theebay community  feedback system  to work  I believe ebay needs to address members concerns.... not the concerns of buyers or sellers as separate groups.

It comes right back to the point that was originally made when negative feedback privileges were revoked for all members in that personally I could be trusted to leave appropriate feedback when I had my buyers hat on however within the blink of an eye I donned my sellers hat and became untrustworthy......

............. at that point being a member, both buyer and seller, I lost a little trust in ebay (probably because ebay through it's actions to not allow me to leave negative feedback in some situations to others members ie they silently signalled "I do not trust you in all situations to be objective") and it's feedback system and I am still struggling to regain it.

[the3coopers]

It comes right back to the point that was originally made when negative feedback privileges were revoked for all members in that personally I could be trusted to leave appropriate feedback when I had my buyers hat on however within the blink of an eye I donned my sellers hat and became untrustworthy

You completely forget that not everyone is like you.

Why should a GOOD buyer get a Negative feedback from a seller, just because they complained (and/or left a Neg) about bad service, poor product or non-delivery?

[digital*ghost]

Why do you separate buyers and sellers in your posts rather than  using the word member given that many members are both buyers and sellers?

It's a point of fact. Only a seller can leave feedback for a buyer, only a seller may wish to leave negative feedback for a buyer. My use of language indicates the role of the person, these points don't neglect to take into consideration that a member can assume both roles as a member. If indeed you are, please don't read things into my words that aren't there - by which I mean how I view, and/or the effect on - eBay members due to the language I use to explain my opinion.

I'm bemused by the fact that your first point (directed at me) was prompted by not reading what I wrote in full (or perhaps you just chose to ignore the rest of the paragraph you quoted just so you could ask a question that was already answered after the line you quoted - but that's kinda trollish behaviour and I have thus far given you more credit than that); and now you're still focussing on one minor aspect of my post but taking it somewhere I never directed it. Particularly unimpressed as your own language divides the role between seller and buyer (when I had my buyers hat on however within the blink of an eye I donned my sellers hat and became untrustworthy - so, you don't have an eBay member hat, then?)

I do you the courtesy of answering you questions, or addressing the specific points you make. I choose to no longer participate in discussion with you unless you're prepared to do me the same courtesy. 😐

[viewmont1071]

I am concentrating on the numbers in the poll not other's posts.

Anonymity allows members to poll as they wish rather than argue the point

....................... I learned from experts... I like to call it ebayitis.. 

bumping the thread gets more views and votes

.... I doubt whether ebay will take any notice however imo it may be more fruitful than just rolling over.

The troll???

How many other threads did you post in yesterday where I popped up??

If it's a thread regarding the poor advertisement/misadvertisement  ebays feedback system  then I will be interested and more than likely will post

[kooee88]

The feedback system doesnt really work anyway, because so many you have given good service to, dont leave feedback at all so how can it be accurate. I have had sales end of last month and no feedback. Its hard to get them...I do the best I can for them too but still, nothing.

Wouldnt it be nice if feedback didnt exist at all. But some kind of new system where it was automatically recorded that you

a) paid promptly or immediately

b) didnt pay at all and had an unpaid item dispute lodged against you

c) kept seller waiting an exended period of time for payment

d) didnt post quickly to your buyer

e) didnt refund for faulty item

and so on.....

That way no personal comments could come into it at all...its much fairer..its sort of reaping what you sow...if you are a bad buyer/seller then your own rep would speak for itself.

I think it all needs over hauling

🙂

[viewmont1071]

Ooh did I spot a NPB thread on the first page.............. bumpety bump bump