eBay in breach of the Sale of Goods Act

[amax-1]

How is eBay getting away with extinguishing a seller's right of protection under the Sale of Goods Act with their Money Back Guarentee Policy?

I am embroiled in a dispute about an item I sold where the tracking didn't update to delivered and the buyer claimed not have received the item. Despite Australia Post claiming from result of investigation that the item was delivered with the scanning subject to an electronics error, eBay provided the buyer with a refund and debited my account to reimburse them?

Section 21 of eBay's User Agreement states "all aspects of the agreement are governed by NSW law" The NSW Sale of Goods Act in Section 35 states delivery to a carrier is deemed delivery to the buyer, that is there is no NSW law supporting the Money Back Guarantee Policy requiring proof of delivery to the buyer which is essentially USA consumer law not applicable in Australia.

Furthermore, PayPal mirrors the Sale of Goods Act where a seller providing proof of postage is protected from INR claims, so what's eBay up to making policy in contradiction to the laws Section 21 of their User Agreement states is governed by?  

[collect247]

The investigation came up empty up to the point where it was processed at a depot and then nothing,so after 2 weeks of searching and coming up empty handed the buyer asked ebay to step in and refunded the buyer immediately.AP so far has refunded the postage and I'm waiting to see if I get the rest back.

But the point here is that a buyer will receive a refund in this situation immediately and the seller can only hope in time to receive theirs but with previous experience only the postage cost was refunded to me,so I will wait and see.

[thecatspjs]

---

@collect247 wrote:

The investigation came up empty up to the point where it was processed at a depot and then nothing,so after 2 weeks of searching and coming up empty handed the buyer asked ebay to step in and refunded the buyer immediately.AP so far has refunded the postage and I'm waiting to see if I get the rest back.

But the point here is that a buyer will receive a refund in this situation immediately and the seller can only hope in time to receive theirs but with previous experience only the postage cost was refunded to me,so I will wait and see.

---

The process is sooo wrong - both legally and ethically IMO.

The dispute process is inherently unfair as it sets a delivery requirement that a seller cannot possibly guarantee as it is a third party's responsibility.

eBay does not honour its promise to give due consideration to each claim as well as undermining other investigative and compensation processes such as AP have.

[joethenuts]

hi clarry could you tell me what is proof of lodgement. lets say as most of you guys use satchels .thanks

[cq_tech]

Proof of lodgement is the receipt AP give you when you hand an item to them across the counter. Printed on it is the time of lodgement and the tracking number. Some also have the postcode of the suburb to which the item is being sent.

[joethenuts]

to clarry how can the buyer be responsible if something goes pear shaped ,how does the buyer know which courier company. the carrier has no record with buyer ,they wont talk to the buyer there prob not reg with them. ,the buyer does not know which courier company or post it was sent by ,the buyer does not know which post office branch or post box it was mailed from ,the seller used the carrier ,the seller knows who they used and what courier company.

[joethenuts]

thanks for the reply , but i am asuming that most parcels go in letters and sachels as a big % . ok letters not much you can say about that, but I have on a couple of times gone and purchase a sachel ,pay   because they are over the counter ,put what ever in them and address and then give it over the counter ,they give me the little tag with tracking no,  now there is no postcode on my docket..

[clarry100]

Ebay do not make the legislation, the Govt does. They just make policies which are supposed to conform to laws but often do not.

Because ebay does what it does certainly does not make it L-A-W law.

You need to read the SOGA and you will find you have rights as a seller over and above the way you have been treated by ebay and AP and the buyers.

If you have followed the laws and have been treated the way you described then you have a firm case to lodge a formal complaint against ebay.

Ownership passes to the buyer once an item is lodged with a carrier and the seller has sufficient proof of that fact.

[clarry100]

Joe... I always use click and send when I go parcel because the tracking number is directly linked to the buyers address when you raise/print the label. Then all I need is the lodgement receipt I get from AP when I lodge the parcel over the counter. Job done.

If you use the AP red (or express) satchels then the tracking number is not associated with the buyer except for the address written on the package. This is not considered enough proof.

If I was doing it this way I would hand write the buyers postcode on the AP receipt and then have them put their stamp on the receipt right at that point on the counter. I do this with express satchels and they don't mind.

Then you will have the buyer's postcode against the tracking number on the receipt and this is then acceptable proof.

[joethenuts]

very interesting   very grey area stamp on a receipt , in this case buyer states did not get goods ,also tracking was not complete,we dont know if lodgement was complete , who would win the case . do you think that taking a photo of the stamped parcel by the post office is lodgement also.

[clarry100]

Yes... taking a photo of the envelope showing the cancelled stamps and the buyers paypal registered address is acceptable proof, at least to PayPal.

We use large letter mostly and a while back had a paypal INR claim against us (before MBG).

Long story and was in another thread way back then...

During that negotiation with PayPal they said they would accept such a photo as proof of lodgement for large letters. There are other sellers in here actually using this method.

At the time the best they would do was to find NO FAULT. That meant we did not lose our money but the buyer also got a refund and got to keep their item which we were very sure they had actually received.