on โ03-04-2014 10:10 AM
Solved! Go to Solution.
on โ03-04-2014 10:38 PM
BBL certainly comes to mind cats
I feel for the seller, he had no idea there was even a problem, and the idea that the seller should know something is faulty ??
*mind boggling*
on โ03-04-2014 10:38 PM
Ugh. "subsequent sail". That's what I get for running ebay's internal spell-check.
on โ03-04-2014 10:40 PM
Yes, it is the seller's responsibility to know what they are selling before listing it, but once it's posted the seller has NO control over the item, can you prove that you didn't break it?
Can you prove the seller knew it was faulty?
Except the refund and move on, it's starting to become silly now, i guarantee you that some of these sellers reading your comments have now added you to there block list.
on โ03-04-2014 10:42 PM
I, for my part, have to wear the cost of sending it to you at my own expense. Let's assume my postage is the same as yours, and I too am now out of pocket $13.40. Although I do receive from you $22.90, which I suppose means I'm $9.50 better off on a cash basis. But the replacement parts I ordered from the US are now essentially useless to me
You can't seriously make this the sellers problem - you did this on your own with no communication with the seller at all.
If you leave a negative, given the messages between you and the seller I am pretty sure he could get it removed by eBay anyway, as digital siad, this is now getting very close to feedback extortion.
on โ03-04-2014 10:43 PM
Except the refund and move on, it's starting to become silly now, i guarantee you that some of these sellers reading your comments have now added you to there block list.
Oh so way ahead of you there LOL
on โ03-04-2014 10:46 PM
Code - here too
on โ03-04-2014 10:58 PM
You don't seem to have understood the post. Try reading it again.
My point is, we're both worse off if the seller gives me a full refund for a return than if the seller a 50% refund without requiring a return. That's because the postage on this item is greater than its original value.
For the sake of argument, let's say I was willing to return the good for the full $22.90 refund. My point is, that wouldn't be a good decision for either of us.
Yes, I am worse off for the reasons you quoted. But the real point of the post was that the seller will be worse off too.
Try reading my post again. Follow the maths. You'll see I'm right.
on โ03-04-2014 11:01 PM
@lancelotlink666 wrote:To dial it back a notch, irrespective of what I am legally entitled to, there's also the question of coming to a resolution that's not completely counter productive for both of us.
The item was sold for $9.50, with $13.40 postage.
Let's say you give me a full refund: that's $22.90. And I send you the cat toy back: it's worth at most $9.50, and that's ignoring the fact that it has a fault not mentioned in the original auction, which presumably means it's worth considerably less. But let's ignore that for the moment and just say that you've paid me $22.90 for the return of something that, at most, is worth $9.50. You're now $13.40 worse off.
In reality, if we assume you're an honest seller and will list the problem in any subsequent sail, I think you'll have difficulty selling it at all. In which case you will actually be the full $22.90 worse off, since you've paid $22.90 for something that's worthless to you.
I, for my part, have to wear the cost of sending it to you at my own expense. Let's assume my postage is the same as yours, and I too am now out of pocket $13.40. Although I do receive from you $22.90, which I suppose means I'm $9.50 better off on a cash basis. But the replacement parts I ordered from the US are now essentially useless to me.
It's clear that if I return it to you for a full refund, we've both lost out.
On the other hand, suppose you give me a 50% refund. In that case you've lost $11.45. This means that you're $1.95 better off than you would have been if I'd returned it to you for a full refund.
Once again, saying that you're $1.95 better off is ignoring the fact that if you list the fault in any future auction, if you're an honest seller and include the fault, you may not sell it at all. If the toy remains unsold, you're $11.45 better off if you just give me a 50% refund.
I'm hoping we can de-escalate this a bit and resolve this rationally. I think if you "do the math" (as our American friends are so fond of saying), you'll see that you are actually better off if you just give me a partial refund.
Regardless of whether ebay or the law requires you to or not.
Your logic and math is sound, but you have to accept that it doesn't matter, and that you're presuming math and dollars is the only - or primary - factor behind the seller's decision. You can't second guess that. As a seller, the resolution I offer to buyers for a faulty item will vary depending on individual circumstances, sometimes I want the item back no matter what and for a number of reasons, I'll also pay the return postage costs on faulty items, so I can be out a couple lots of postage, not just one - money / loss etc doesn't always dictate these things from the seller's perspective.
It's unfortunate the transaction has progressed in this way, but I can't see that there's anything more constructive I can add to the discussion, other than the hope you both can reach a mutually agreeable solution.
on โ03-04-2014 11:07 PM
@digital*ghost wrote:
@lancelotlink666 wrote:To dial it back a notch, irrespective of what I am legally entitled to, there's also the question of coming to a resolution that's not completely counter productive for both of us.
The item was sold for $9.50, with $13.40 postage.
Let's say you give me a full refund: that's $22.90. And I send you the cat toy back: it's worth at most $9.50, and that's ignoring the fact that it has a fault not mentioned in the original auction, which presumably means it's worth considerably less. But let's ignore that for the moment and just say that you've paid me $22.90 for the return of something that, at most, is worth $9.50. You're now $13.40 worse off.
In reality, if we assume you're an honest seller and will list the problem in any subsequent sail, I think you'll have difficulty selling it at all. In which case you will actually be the full $22.90 worse off, since you've paid $22.90 for something that's worthless to you.
I, for my part, have to wear the cost of sending it to you at my own expense. Let's assume my postage is the same as yours, and I too am now out of pocket $13.40. Although I do receive from you $22.90, which I suppose means I'm $9.50 better off on a cash basis. But the replacement parts I ordered from the US are now essentially useless to me.
It's clear that if I return it to you for a full refund, we've both lost out.
On the other hand, suppose you give me a 50% refund. In that case you've lost $11.45. This means that you're $1.95 better off than you would have been if I'd returned it to you for a full refund.
Once again, saying that you're $1.95 better off is ignoring the fact that if you list the fault in any future auction, if you're an honest seller and include the fault, you may not sell it at all. If the toy remains unsold, you're $11.45 better off if you just give me a 50% refund.
I'm hoping we can de-escalate this a bit and resolve this rationally. I think if you "do the math" (as our American friends are so fond of saying), you'll see that you are actually better off if you just give me a partial refund.
Regardless of whether ebay or the law requires you to or not.
Your logic and math is sound, but you have to accept that it doesn't matter, and that you're presuming math and dollars is the only - or primary - factor behind the seller's decision. You can't second guess that. As a seller, the resolution I offer to buyers for a faulty item will vary depending on individual circumstances, sometimes I want the item back no matter what and for a number of reasons, I'll also pay the return postage costs on faulty items, so I can be out a couple lots of postage, not just one - money / loss etc doesn't always dictate these things from the seller's perspective.
It's unfortunate the transaction has progressed in this way, but I can't see that there's anything more constructive I can add to the discussion, other than the hope you both can reach a mutually agreeable solution.
Which you would probably be better off doing in private, rather than the public boards.
on โ03-04-2014 11:11 PM
All I can say to the seller is putting everything else aside, ignoring totally the question of feedback, let's just zero in on two scenarios:
1. I return the product to you for a full refund.
2. You give me a 50% refund without requiring a return.
If you do the sums, you can clearly see that you will be better off following the second choice rather than the first. It is the better business decision here - for both of us. I'm not asking you to do anything other than follow your own self-interest.