<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Warning to Buyers – eBay’s AI Ignored Clear Counterfeit Evidence. in Member To Member Support</title>
    <link>https://community.ebay.co.uk/t5/Member-To-Member-Support/Warning-to-Buyers-eBay-s-AI-Ignored-Clear-Counterfeit-Evidence/m-p/7944391#M321186</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;It's unusual for eBay to refuse a money back guarantee claim. Normally cases seem to be found automatically found in the buyer's favour, with the onus being on the seller to appeal.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Did you perhaps not follow the procedure correctly in some way? The most common mistake is to open an ordinary return request, which as your seller had a no returns policy they would have been entitled to refuse.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Or if you resisted returning the item, even a money back guarantee case would have failed. eBay is unlikely even to have attempted to verify whether the perfume was authentic. Buyers almost always have to return the item concerned before eBay will issue a refund. An exception is, or was (I haven't checked recently) when a buyer provides independent documentary evidence that the item was counterfeit. This was hardly ever used as it's so much easier for buyers to return the item using the prepaid label that the seller is required to provide.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2025 10:47:29 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>red_magpie</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-10-18T10:47:29Z</dc:date>
  </channel>
</rss>

