I bought something on ebay. The seller's description was lousy, the shipping took forever, and he nearly doubled the bid price with a whopping "handling charge". So I leave him negative feedback, right? Well, he's one of the many now who refuse to leave the seller any feedback at all unless they leave him positive feedback first, leaving the seller open to a punitive false negative feedback in retaliation.
Is there any counter-tactic to this increasingly widespread evasion of the ebay feedback policy?
For a guy who believes it is a joke to steal UPS hand trucks, you've come
180° in your righteousness and indignation stance when it comes to someone nicking your pocketbook.
How does it feel?
have a friend who likes to drop off packages at the big UPS centers because they always have lots of old beater aluminum hand trucks lying around their parking lots. He says he brings one home every now and then "just to make sure someone bad doesn't steal it". :-)
No, in fact eBay's new "mutual removal" system promotes feedback abuse. Bad members can leave someone else negative feedback, then offer to remove it. This leaves it impossible for the other person to neg the bad guy in the future.
I emailed eBay saying I was a little concerned about this, but I just got back a standard "we'll evaluate you important suggestion..."
Yea, but the Mutual removal system involves Square Trade (also part of ebay conglomeration of ripoffs) and one of the parties is gonna have to fork over $20.00 to pay for mediation when it comes to feedback removal.Been there done that...............Their statement states, it can take 2 to 4 weeks for your complaint to go to a mediator and an action is decided upon. Then it states one of the parties is going to have to pay a mediator fee, which must be paid up front prior to it going for mediation...........just as soon as the PayPal transaction is completed for paying the $20.00 you get a approval that your request has been made and your feedback will be removed within 10 business days..........so much for the so called time frame, its just the $20.00 they want, then they hit the delete key.probably no mediators involved at all, just a personpaid $6.00 an hour that can't speak english hitting delete key all day long, raking in the money. heck they are not gonna fix any feedback problem as if it bothers you so much they will remove it for a fee, its just their way of making more money..and who says things that are broken don;t work! Visit my website:
formatting link
expressed are those of my wifes, I had no input whatsoever. Remove "nospam" from email addy.
Hmm. I think I might know somebody who's been through this a bit.
Oh, Harold!!
:)
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
"jim rozen" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@drn.newsguy.com...
Yep! Been through it more than enough. Our still unresolved issue with:
Michael J. Myers and Mary Dowd Myers Antiques & Fine Arts
1600 4th St N Saint Petersburg, FL 33704-4302 (727) 823-3249 snipped-for-privacy@aol.com
is a perfect example of having done the right thing, right down to making an inquiry as to the condition of an item before bidding, and being told lies. Not only did the sellers fail to list the repair of the collectible, they also denied it when asked specifically if there were any issues with condition prior to our bidding on their damaged goods. Only after we had received the item in question, a piece of art glass, did we discover that it had been repaired, and very poorly. It was impossible to ignore. At that point the sellers said it wasn't a repair, but an inclusion. When we asked why it wasn't disclosed, we were told that they had no obligation to disclose the repair. If we were unhappy, they would make a partial refund. The offer for the partial refund was withdrawn almost immediately, so the indication is that these people knew exactly what they were doing when they listed the item for auction. It was not an oversight that they didn't disclose the repair, their actions were based on knowledge that repaired art glass items suffer tremendous loss of value. By failing to disclose the repair, they stood to profit unfairly, and that is exactly what they have done. Mean time they have thumbed their nose at any and all requests to make a full refund, and lied at every turn about attempting to make restitution. Anyone that uses the services of ebay should be aware of these people and how they do business.
One of the lies told was: "User vordoinwa was given the opportunity to return the vase for a full refund and chose instead to behave in such a rude, threatening manner which we will not tolerate. He sealed his fate with that behavior and hopefully will learn an important lesson when dealing with respectful individuals in the future."
The rude and threatening manner to which they made reference was my telling them that they should have disclosed the repair, and that they opened the door to legal action by fraudulently listing the piece.
They never offered a full refund, and retracted an offer for the partial refund the moment we asked about shipping fees.
Interestingly, to them, it was within their rights and perfectly acceptable to lie to the buyers of their wares, but they took exception to us for demanding to have been told the truth. What a shining example these people are in a civilized society.
Respectful individuals? These liars? Hardly. Respectful individuals don't lie to people to wring money from their pockets. These people are nothing more than common criminals that have committed a felony and thumbed their nose at the legal system.. They should be in jail, and certainly do not deserve any respect.
We waited for two months, giving the sellers every opportunity to make restitution, before posting negative feedback. Need we tell you they seized the opportunity to return the favor? After lying and stealing from us, they felt it just to then make the problems at hand our fault. How dare we expect the truth?
Ebay, in this instance, has treated as reasonably well, but their system, as far as I'm concerned, is broken. If you put things in perspective, it's a business that makes a huge profit, and they intend for it to continue to do so. They don't rock the boat unnecessarily. All the evidence at hand indicates that Michael J Myers and his operation, at least in our situation, fraudulently offered his goods by misrepresenting the condition of the piece, and should not be permitted to remain a member in good standing with ebay. Considering his over 600 positive feedbacks, however, does anyone here expect that they will eliminate him? The small amount of money Susan received from ebay for his misdeeds will be recovered by them in short order, thanks to his large number of listings, so they have every incentive to continue the course. In my estimation, ebay should put some teeth in their policy and eliminated those that pull these tricks.
As a result of Susan's poor experience with Myers, she no longer bids on art glass. She refuses to bid any more than she is comfortable in losing. Her loss at Myers hand was staggering for a house wife, one that has no income. That, for all the sellers that run an honest business, takes away from them the extra bidder, the one that may have run up the value of their wares. All the honest dealers pay a price for the permissive attitude of ebay.
Actually, eBay's policy says that feedback is voluntary. So there is no evasion. As a seller, I have no obligation to leave you any feedback. Ever.
Personally I think that eBay's feedback system needs to be rethought.
The way it stands right now, if I am a seller on eBay, I will not leave feedback for a buyer until they leave feedback for me. As a seller, my feedback reputation translates into dollars in my pocket. If I collect too many negs, people will stop bidding on my stuff and I'll lose money. Consequently I am very afraid of getting a neg so I will play a cat-and-mouse game to avoid one. That means that I will not leave any feedback until I am confident that you, as my buyer, will not retaliate with a neg.
Feedback is not nearly so important for a buyer. If I am a buyer, even if I've got lousy feedback, I can still snipe the auction in the last few seconds and there is nothing that the seller can do about it. The seller is stuck with me. If I turn out to be a deadbeat bidder, then he can file a non-paying-bidder alert with eBay and eventually he will get his fees back. But if he leaves me a neg, I will retaliate and neg him back.
eBay does not provide a realistic mechanism where I, as a seller, can block a bidder with poor feedback.
On the other hand, there is a very realistic mechanism where I, as a buyer, can block a seller with poor feedback: I simply don't bid!
My opinion is that feedback for a buyer is nearly meaningless. Even good feedback does not mean that the buyer is "good" because so many sellers do not leave negs. They don't leave them because they know that dead-beat buyers retaliate without cause.
Your initial question was whether there a counter-tactic. I'd say that you have a very powerful weapon in your hands. Go ahead and neg the seller. (I'm assuming that you've made reasonable attempts to work this out with him first).
BTW, you don't sell under the same ID with which you buy do you? Never do that. Always have a selling ID that is different from your buying ID. Keep the feedback on you selling ID pristine and go ahead and collect retaliatory negs on your buying ID.
Hmmmm. Interesting. As a non-ebay user, the more I read, the more I get the idea that staying away from ebay was one of my better ideas. Not just the auctions, but in other groups, I've read some stories that include another part of ebay, paypal, and the abuses paypal has. The two cannot be separated, as one is part of the other, and reading the conditions of paypal that you agreed to should convince you that the only winner is going to be paypal. There have been more than a few ebay auctions that were clear copyright violations, or of selling things that are in the public domain, yet ebay has no obligation to compensate or correct any situation resulting in a loss. In another group, I read of one that bid and won a fairly expensive item, more than $10K, and when he went to take posession, found that it had been sold to another, and the seller refused to return the money. Ebay was, of course, not at fault, but did exactly nothing, it had to be resolved in court, meaning the buyer lost again by having to pay lawyers fees.
Granted, the things you read on the groups are only going to be the negatives, but even ONE is one too many. Safe way is to not use ebay. Babin and his many aliases should tell you why. There is no protection, of any practical use, in any of the ebay systems, ebay is the only one that is protected from anything. Being able to leave "negative feedback" after you've lost a goodly sum is hardly being protected from anything, somewhat futile and useless.
Not really. This is a mis-statement. I have purchased items off ebay off and on over the years, and have NEVER used paypal. Nor would I.
Most ebay sellers are happy to take a personal check, some need a money order. For small items I simply send cash in the US mails. Never had any problems.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
Sorry I was unclear, I didn't mean that one had to use pp in order to use ebay, just that the abuses of one also have to reflect on the other, they are only different parts of the same conglomeration. IF they are poorly setup in one area, it is safe and reasonable to assume that all of their holdings are as poorly setup.
Don't know if it was a glitch, or a change in their site, but the last time I went to look at completed sales, I was told I had to sign on, which I cannot do, I don't and won't have an account with ebay. Not that I think it's a loss, not much there reflects reallity when it comes to pricing. Lennie the Lurker
As a seller, I routinely do not leave feedback until it is received.
Not because I want to cover my ass, or because I think feedback is some big game of last word.
Simply, it is because I believe that the feedback should reflect the entire transaction, and that I believe the buyer's duties are not finished when the check is mailed.
Case in point, a friend of mine deals in antique textiles. In his ebay dealings, he is the most scrupulous person when it comes to describing the condition. He will spend an hour photographing and writing a description on a piece he only hopes to get his money back out of.
He sold a piece, not a big deal maybe $125, to a woman. He corresponded with her 2 or 3 times before the close of the auction. She won. She paid. He sent her the piece.
This is where she stopped living up to her part of the bargain. She holds the piece for a week and a half and decides it does not look go with the rest of the furniture in the room and wants to return it.
This is not a reasonable excuse for breaking an auction contract and my buddy says, "No, all sales are final." Bad feedback is thrown around and arbitration is started, when my buddy says, "I don't need these headaches." and gives her back her dough.
When I don't leave the first feedback, it is because I do not believe the transaction is done until the items are received and the customer is satisfied. If the customer is not satisfied, I expect to be worked out between me and the customer, and at the end of that, I still might leave positive feedback for the other party.
Often as not, I have no idea if the customer is satisfied, or even received the goods, until they leave feedback.
I disagree with that. I think that pricing before ebay was often skewed. If you study economics you will find that it is all based on an ideal marketplace, one in which if anyone anywhere offers a good or service at some price that it is instantly known to all anywhere. This is very much not true in the world today. When ebay came along, though, we all took a large step in that direction. Now an antique store no longer has the only Lunkheimer steam whistle you'll see in your lifetime, you can price-shop for items 100 years old against each other. A really good tactic to use against a local seller selling through a classified ad and asking too much money is to tell them "those go all day long for $XXX on ebay". They check, and very often the price changes. This would not happen if it weren't for ebay.
I use paypal all the time with no problems. I use ebay a lot too. It makes selling easy. The one single change I'd like to see in ebay is for ebay to require that sellers post feedback first before a buyer can even leave feedback for the seller. That way no seller can accumulate feedback without always leaving himself open to negative feedbacks. The way it is now, you can't trust feedbacks any more. About three times in the last year I've had really bad deals but couldn't leave negative feedback for the seller, who deserved it, because he had refused to first post positive feedback for me, who deserved it. So they continue to look like real good sellers.
Oh, well, two can play at that game. I like the idea of having a separate buying and selling account. I guess I'll have to do that.
Indeed! And this happens a LOT, now that Ebay has become pretty well known.
And when the inevitable "well then buy it off Ebay" pops up..you simply do exactly that.
Gunner
"The entire population of Great Britain has been declared insane by their government. It is believed that should any one of them come in possession of a firearm, he will immediately start to foam at the mouth and begin kiling children at the nearest school. The proof of their insanity is that they actually believe this." -- someone in misc.survivalism
I won't argue with the statement that many sellers are poor business people. However, quite frankly, I don't think that withholding feedback is necessarily the mark of poor business practice. I'd say that it's more the mark of a seller who is forced to play by the rules of the eBay game board and is playing that game to maximize his profits.
I don't know how adamant you are about receiving feedback. Some buyers threaten to neg a seller who does not leave positive feedback first. In fact, I have received just such a threat. If buyers start doing that en masse then sellers will have to change the way they play the game. However, I think it highly unlikely that that will happen.
Buy from a seller who has good feedback, meaning a feedback score of
99% or better, anything less than 99% is cause for question and concern. Buy from a seller who stands behind his sales. You can always glean that information from the listing and from the comments in his feedback.
Leave him positive if he was good and leave him negative if he failed and then move on. It really doesn't matter if he leaves you any feedback. It would just be nice, that's all.
To leave a seller a neg, he'd have to fail in more than one aspect of the sale. I would not neg a guy if he sent me a dud item. However, I would neg him if he refused to fix it.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.