I’ve been doing a little research and think aside from the ACCC, disaffected sellers should also lodge a complaint with the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority (APRA), specifically questioning why eBay was granted a licence to provide insurance services to buyers’ on its site, without that licence being made subject eBay becoming a member of the Financial Ombudsman Service.

I would also suggest it might be prudent to ask for an explanation as to why, they allowed two related companies, both of which come under their jurisdiction (eBay and PayPal) to enter into an agreement which allows one (eBay) access sellers funds held by the other (PayPal), without the requirement to judicially prove the existence of a debt. That is, whereas ordinarily an insurer can only recover from a third party after the right to recover has been judicial determined, eBay, in concert with PayPal are now able to access sellers funds by simply asserting a right to recover against the seller might exist.

I would also steer them to these boards so that they can see for themselves the self-service manner in which the claims process is being managed by both eBay and PayPal, and the often infantile reasons given when attempting to justify claims outcomes.