I lost a case where i had only the tracking number on the new parcel post plus satchels, as there was no proof it was sent, tracking showed it was delivered, how stupid is that.

I also had 8 other sellers all state the same from this buyer, that buyer leaves a green dot, with "Bad seller" when i contacted all these sellers they all stated the same, buyer claimed item not received.

I got all sellers to email ebay and paypal and let them know that this buyer is a scammer, yet i still lost even with all that proof.

Ive not had any fb from him yet though, but he always leaves a positive anyway lol

Phone PayPal and ask to speak to a supervisor.

Tell the supervisor that they have all the information and they need, and it’s time to reverse their decision.  Also tell them they have 24 hours to do so, or you’ll lodge a dispute with the Financial Ombudsman Service.

My bet is, they’ll cave shortly after the O word is used, and if not, shortly after you actually lodge the complaint, and in any event it’s a free service so you have nothing to lose.

 As for the other sellers, you may want to draw their attention to this thread.  

I had a buyer open a non received dipsute less than 24 hours after paying and then the next day changed it to item not as described and I phoned PP and they cancelled the dispute as the tracking was C&S and showing as lodged BUT had not been delivered as it was still in transit.

As for the buyer lodging a dispute with Ombudsman: sellers can, buyers can’t.

What is that based on TB?

I have, as a buyer, filled in the complaint form as have several other regular posters.

In mine and other cases I know of if you are in the right then Paypal will cave in without it actually having to go through to the next stage but there is nothing in the on line form that appears to preclude a buyer applying and a case number being assigned.

On refection, I think my statement may have been a little too broad in its application, mainly because it assumes all buyer disputes will be limited to a decision not to make a discretionary payment, whereas in some instances that may not be the case.

Take for instance an item not received claim.

When the buyer makes a claim, implied within the agreement is a requirement that PayPal conduct a proper investigation before making a decision, and if the outcome of that investigation is no recovery right exists, they can say to the buyer, “sorry but as postage is proved there is nothing more we can do” but this of course will erode buyer confidence in PayPal Buyer Protection and the more that confidence is eroded the less likely it is that buyers' will continue to use PayPal to protect their purchases.  On the hand, to retain buy confidence they could say, “as the seller has proved postage we can’t recover.  But fear not because we’ll compensate you by gifting you the money out of our own pocket”; that is make a discretionary payment.

Now there are two issues here. 

The buyer was induced by PayPal to use PayPal because it offered Buyer Protection, and though some (most) buyers may think Protection = Insurance, the User Agreement makes it clear the service on offer is as Recovery Service and not Insurance. 

However, as previously stated, though the protection is limited to the provision of a recovery service, there is an implied obligation on PayPal to conduct a proper investigation before making a determination, and if they find no recovery right exists, then, that decision would be disputable by the buyer.  That is they could turn around to the Ombudsman and say, ‘they got the decision wrong because postage was never proved to the requisite degree, and as such, they should have, on my behalf, taken action against the seller to get my money back.  Now, if the Ombudsman agrees that should have been the investigation outcome, then they could order PayPal to do exactly that.

On the other hand if the Ombudsman finds that PayPal’s decision was correct, the Ombudsman can’t go on say to PayPal, “though your decision was correct, you should have compensated the buyer by way of a discretionary payment”.  That is, if at the core of the dispute is PayPal’s decision not to make a discretionary payment, then the only way the buyer can dispute that decision is by way of a Judicial Review, and the Ombudsman doesn’t have jurisdiction when it comes to Judicial Reviews.

So the short answer is, if the buyer disputes PayPal’s decision that no recovery right exists, the Ombudsman can hear the matter.   On the other hand, if the buyer is disputing PayPal’s decision not to make a discretionary payment, then the Ombudsman must refuse then buyer’s application on the grounds of a want of jurisdiction.

 On the other hand, if the buyer is disputing PayPal’s decision not to make a discretionary payment, then the Ombudsman must refuse then buyer’s application on the grounds of a want of jurisdiction.

Sorry TB,but I beg to differ.That was EXACTLY my grounds for a complaint to the Ombudsman re an SNAD that was going to cost more to post back than original cost.I 'won' ie Paypal granted me a discretionary payment AFTER the Ombudsman contacted them.

JMO but Paypal doesn't like when people complain to Ombudsman as it probably costs them more time & money to respond than it would to refund out of their own coffers so to speak.

I take it the facts in your case were as follows.

You bought something, which you say was SNAD.

You lodged a claim with PayPal and they told you to send it back, and when the seller confirms receipt, they (PayPal) will require the seller to provide a refund.

Now if I understand you correctly, if you had sent it back, the cost of returning it would have been more than you paid for it.  Therefore, you disputed PayPal decision that before you got your refund you had to send it back, and if that is the case,  you placed PayPal in a very awkward position. 

When you paid with PayPal, you agreed that should the item not be as described you would return it to the seller at you own cost before you got the refund. On the other hand, when the seller offered PayPal they created a legal obligation on PayPal to ensure that, when it comes to SNAD claims, any refund was conditional on the item being returned at the buyer expense.  Therefore, on the one hand, if PayPal made you return it, any benefit you would have obtained vide PayPal Buyer Protection policy would have been rendered a nullity.  On the other hand, if PayPal decided to let you keep it, but at the same time force the seller to give you a refund, then this would lead to a complaint by the seller that PayPal had breached their own agreement.  From this point onwards, legally, it would get very messy and costly, not the least of which being, a decision that you were allowed to keep something without paying for it.

The solution.  Get rid of the problem by making an ex-gratia payment.  That is the discretionary payment wasn’t what was being disputed.  Instead, it was the solution to the dispute.  

Just to follow up on the original story for this sale,

As today is now Tuesday i have not received a message from said buyer at all, I have submitted the evidence to PAYPAL, they are now contacting the buyer. It still blows my mind a buyer can open an INR case the day of purchase and paypal put the funds on hold. For that to happen he had to purchase the product, then literally go to PP and open a case INR???? Really...who does that..then says he wants a full refund if I can not provide tracking...REALLY!!!! Wow...Guess I will just sit tight and wait for the item not as described case as soon as it does arrive though.

(Slams head on keyboard)

Offers Ice for Head X-(