Have you ever seen how toys are tested for safety? 

I am with the buyer too, Of course a toy that promises hours of fun at a party with, presumably, many children playing with it is not as described if it breaks after a couple of hours. I would have asked for a photo of the damage and once received I would have refunded in full without asking for return, after all you are not out what the buyer paid, just what the actual postage was plus a couple of bucks for the cheap toy.

If you sell something that does not do what it is intended or breaks first up you return it for a refund, why should toys be any different ?

Not if it is useless.  Photo should suffice.  Whyshould the buyer have to spend money on postage to return broken = worthless item?  The buyer spent $17, if they send it back with trackable means they will end with less than $10.  Guess that is better than nothing, but not really happy outcome, not to mention the upset child who may like the planes.

I do not understand why would any seller want back damaged item?

I do not understand why would any seller want back damaged item?

I have a no partial refund, or refund without return policy in place. Works for me.

Think SN, think.

.If parts fall off when they are played with it is not a toy...it becomes a potential choking hazard.

Choice review ..

Small parts - choking hazards

The Australian standard for toys, AS/NZS ISO 8124.1, includes tests designed to find any small parts, whether supplied or which come free as a result of typical rough play or foreseeable misuse of the toy. These include drop tests onto a hard floor; tension and torque tests to see if any parts can be pulled or twisted off with minimal force; and compression tests.

These tests are the most common source of failure for the toys on test. Many of them have small parts that come free or break off, often after only one or two drops or with minimal force in the tension test. The standard test uses a specific device to determine if the part is small enough to constitute a choking hazard, but as a guide, any part small enough to fit into a 35mm film canister is a potential choking hazard. Some of the small parts that break off are also sharp or jagged.

Many of the battery-operated toys have a battery compartment cover with a hole for a screw to keep it shut, but have no actual screw supplied or installed. Unsurprisingly, these covers are easily opened and are often among the first parts to come off when the toy is dropped, with the result that the batteries often fall out as well. Batteries can be very dangerous to children, especially if put in the mouth or swallowed, so this is a serious failure.

I do not understand why would any seller want back damaged item?

Ho hum....try again....

I have a no partial refund, or refund without return policy in place. Works for me.

Think SN, think.

If buyer was not happy when they received they should have contacted the OP at that point, not after they let child play with and break the item.

If buyer was not happy when they received they should have contacted the OP at that point, not after they let child play with and break the item.

Wasn't the buyer not happy because a wheel fell of the toy when the child played with it ?

If that it the case I would doubt that the toy would comply with and pass the Australian Toy Safety Standards ?

See above for the tests (and how rigorous they are) re choking hazard.

The seller may be very lucky the child didn't choke.

From the feedback I think you can assume that the buyer realised when they first received it with original low price sticker that it was not to the quality they expected.

IMO a responsible parent would not have given a suspect "cheap" low quality toy to a child to play with.

some people may not be very bright thecatspjs .I suppose that's not a crime and what the buyer 

 did/does as a parent won't help the seller with their selling issue.