Offering a refund if the feedback is removed or revised would lead to some buyers causing the seller even more trouble, it is classed as feedback extortion.

What they should have done is issue the refund then ask if they would revise the feedback if they sent a request.

It is to be hoped the buyer either doesn't know or got out of the right side of the bed this morning so it does not end in complete disaster.

Although it was good that the seller arranged things with the buyer they should never have assumed the buyer was willing to pay for a personal delivery, should have been made clear from the getgo.

---

@clarry100 wrote:

DG...

 

According to the history I have there had been no discussion whatsoever about any postage compensation during the discussion about delivery before the fact. The seller had thought (and quite rightfully so IMHO) that the postage fee would go some way towards the actual cost to her of performing the delivery. After all the original listing never advertised FREE delivery/postage.

 

That is why the seller was so flabergasted when the buyer left the NEG. It seemed so uncalled for to her after what she had done in good faith.

 

 

---

That's why I made the  face.

When there's a conversation happening about changing delivery methods and/or terms, neither party can assume the other to be aware of the other's expectations, so each one has the responsibility of making themselves clear. It's all very well to say it's all the seller's responsibility, but some things don't even occur to even the most conscientious of sellers for one reason or another, so if something is an open question / issue for a buyer, it definitely becomes their responsibility to broach the subject if the seller hasn't, so they know exactly what's happening and where they stand, as well as have the opportunity to say something like, well in that case, I'd prefer you post it. 

---

@clarry100 wrote:

 

It is only now that she has offered a 50% refund of the postage costs in return for removal of the NEG by the buyer.

---

My only concern with that other than the fact I probably wouldn't have offered 50% (I wouldn't have offered any refund), but you never know until you are in the situation yourself, maybe they agreed there was fault on both sides - Buyer didn't ask & Seller would have thought (and I agree)  it was reasonable to put postage paid toward delivery costs.

Sorry, back to my concern which is that it could be seen as feedback extortion perhaps by eBay ?  It would probably depend on how the exchanged messages have been worded and the Buyers knowledge of policies . . . .

Ooops sorry, I see phorum has mentioned that also - apologies, was responding as I was catching up

Yes PJ... I don't know the exact details of what transpired between seller and buyer to arrive at what appears to be an agreement to have the feedback removed in exchange for a 50% postage refund. But essentially that is where its currently at.

And I take the point that depending on how it was negotiated in the messages its possible it could be viewed as feedback extortion by ebay if indeed it was reported that way. But who would be viewed as the extort-or(??) and who as the extort-ee(??) (and hence who would wear the wrath of ebay) would have to be extracted from the messages. I guess it would depend on who made the first offer and what it was.

Very interesting case with a few little twists and turns this one.

But won't the neg still remain that way ?

Will either Seller or Buyer still have grounds to request removal of the Defect ?  I might be wrong, and I hope I am, but I don't think so

As I understand it, if the buyer revises to pos, the defect should be removed and if revised to a neut, defect remains.

However with the recent changes to seller defects in Feb, not sure if defects are issued for neuts now.

Seller is more concerned about a neg being visible to potential buyers and a single defect won't effect their selling.

Thanks for the clarification clarry. 

Duh, how silly of me, of course - shame on me