My Leadership Team Experience - Feedback That Clearly Violates eBay Policy - Denied - Tough

[partsguysuk]

Hi all,

Last night I spent 75 minutes on live chat starting at 9pm trying to resolve the below issue. The first first agent kept me on "hold" in the chat for 20 mins and it disconnected. I then reconnected and got through, they passed me through to the leadership team.

I’m hoping someone from eBay or the community can help clarify an ongoing issue that’s both frustrating and, frankly, quite concerning in terms of how the Feedback Policy is being applied.

A buyer left the following feedback on my account:

“STAY AWAY FROM THIS SELLER!! They use pictures of quality parts then send you cheap rubbish! happened to me before with shock absorbers and I thought I’d give them the benefit of the doubt so didn’t leave negative feedback then, but this time they deserve it, the listing shows 8 cam followers (INA) which i thought sounded cheap so I specifically message them before placing an order to ask if the listing was definitely for 8, the reply was yes so I ordered then received 1 in a small bag🤦‍♂️ 😡”

This was our reply:

My staff member made a mistake when telling you that it is per 8 and I agree that the listing picture can be confusing. As soon as I realised the error I offered you a refund straight away and I have sent you the image of the actual box it came from showing it is a genuine INA part. As they only come in boxes of 8, this listing is meant to be for 1. So for every 8 tappets there is 1 box. The rest have to be sent out loose. They are INA. My staff member just got it wrong. For that I am sorry.

While I acknowledge that there was an error in quantity sent—and we’ve offered to rectify it—the language and structure of this comment are in direct violation of several sections of eBay's feedback policy.

Here’s why I believe the feedback should qualify for removal:

---

Personal Attack on Business / Not Constructive

“STAY AWAY FROM THIS SELLER!! They use pictures of quality parts then send you cheap rubbish!”

This is exactly what the policy refers to under: “Personal attacks that could harm the reputation of the seller or their business and could not reasonably be viewed as constructive criticism.”

This is a blanket statement that serves no purpose other than to deter business—not feedback about a specific item or resolution.

---

Refers to Past, Irrelevant Transactions

“Happened to me before with shock absorbers...”

This refers to a previous transaction not part of this purchase. The policy states eBay will remove:

“Comments intended for a different item or seller.”

This previous experience has no place in current feedback.

---

Possible Feedback Manipulation

“Didn’t leave negative feedback then, but this time they deserve it…”
This implies the buyer held back negative feedback from a prior transaction and is now doubling down. This raises questions under: “Feedback used to extort or manipulate.”

---

Despite clearly referencing these violations and pointing support agents directly to the specific wording, I was repeatedly told the feedback is “valid” because it reflects the buyer’s experience.

When I highlighted that the policy includes attacks against the business—not just personal insults—I was told it doesn’t apply, only to be given a different explanation minutes later.

This feels like subjective interpretation over objective application of the policy.

I’m not looking to silence genuine feedback—but if the policy exists, then it should be applied consistently and transparently. Right now, it feels like genuine sellers are not being protected despite following eBay’s rules and offering resolutions.

I would appreciate any guidance from the community or moderators on how this can be reviewed fairly, based on the actual wording of the policy, not an interpretation. 

Thanks

[tressygirl]

You agree,  and I agree with the buyer , that the picture,  which plays an important part of a description,  clearly shows 8 items, and to be sent one is misleading.  Hopefully you have amended this listing ?

You do raise some very valid points why the feedback should be removed,  e.g. the Personal attacks which does harm your reputation as a seller.

Try CS again,  but this time only very first thing on a weekday morning at 8 a.m. when there's more chance of Dublin answering, you can receive different responses,  from different agents.

However,  if they see that the feedback has to stay your feedback response is very good admitting to an error, apologising and refunding, that feedback would not put me off from buying from you.

This is the easiest and quickest way to contact eBay Customer Services, for a Call Back option.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/help/eua?id=5275&mkevt=1&mkpid

Lines open 8 a.m. - 10 p.m. on weekdays

9 a.m. - 6 p.m. on weekends.

Automated agents will be available on chat outside of the above hours.

As said,  I recommend contacting CS first thing in the morning as there's more chance of Dublin answering.

@partsguysuk 

[papso22]

Sorry but I don't think that feedback clearly breaches the policy at all and I doubt that ebay will remove it.

[partsguysuk]

Ok, can you explain how it doesn't.

What you "think" about it doesn't really matter. Look at the facts and then compare it to the policy.

Opinion doesn't matter here. Policy does.

Thanks

[partsguysuk]

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

The most frustrating thing is that the leadership agent was from Dublin and was the one changing their opinion on policy.

That's what is staggering to me. Part of being a leader is admitting where you were wrong. Not blindly ignoring facts because it doesn't fit your narrative. 

That's not leadership, transparent or fair.

[papso22]

With a subjective policy opinion is everything.  Obviously in the opinion of ebay CS it doesn't meet the bar needed for removal, I agree.

There is sufficient in the feedback to make it the buyers experience of that transaction, which you admit by your response went wrong for them.

I am simply saying don't get your hopes up about removal.

Your combined neutral and negative numbers are not good, rather than spend time on eBay CS have you looked at what is happening internally that leads to that feedback?

[partsguysuk]

Hi

The policy isn't subjective though for the issues I have raised. It clearly
defines what is and what isn't eligible for removal.

Policy states it should be removed. You can't explain (other than your opinion why). I explained clearly why due to policy.

I'd rather you keep your comments/opinions purely on topic and not throw
extra bits in here.

With regards to advising me what to do with my account. I'm good, thanks.

This is within 14 months. If I wanted your view on my account. I would have asked for it.

 

[partsguysuk]

This is exactly what the policy says:

“Personal attacks that could harm the reputation of the seller or their business and could not reasonably be viewed as constructive criticism.”

Their whole blanket statement that serves no purpose other than to deter business. Its not feedback about a specific item or resolution.

Ebay also states specifically in the policy that you cannot refer to other transactions and/or items.

“Happened to me before with shock absorbers...

This previous experience has no place in current feedback

[jckl1957]

If Ebay do agree to remove any of the feedback (to me, it is based on the buyer's experience - he thinks the items he bought were not genuine and is allowed to express that opinion, and clearly did not receive what he believed he was buying) they may simply take out the comment regarding the previous transaction.

Although you insist the policy is not subjective, it is open to interpretation.

In my (subjective) interpretation, it doesn't break any rules although the comment about the previous transaction might do.

Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if other members agree or disagree with you.

You must put your case to Ebay again.

[partsguysuk]

Thanks for your reply.

I agree where we were at error for sure and completely get the buyers frustrations there. I offered to send him the whole box with the 8 inside but didn't get a response.

I completely get why the policy is there and that parts of it can be open to interpretation.

However the parts that I've listed aren't open to interpretation otherwise it would have said we "MAY" remove feedback in these circumstances. Not that we "WILL" remove it.

I guess that's the most important bit?

Thanks again 

[partsguysuk]

I'd gladly accept the comment being removed also. The customer has a right to express their thoughts and opinions on their experience.

However policies are there for a reason and clearly it states they "WILL" remove the whole feedback in these specific situations, not just the comment.

Thanks again

[red_magpie]

Opinion doesn't matter here. Policy does.

Policy is open to interpretation. Not everyone would agree with everything that you claim as a violation of eBay's feedback policy. Plus you need to be aware that eBay's guiding mantra is the buyer's right to reflect their experience as they see it, and you accept they had a genuine complaint that the listing was misleading. eBay is famously reluctant to remove buyers' feedback.

Although I agree that you have a case, I think you're arguing it on too many fronts. Your torrent of arguments is liable to so overwhelm customer support that they will just hang up on you. This often happens when they feel there's no point in talking further. There will be no appeal if they do, and eBay doesn't have a complaints procure.

IMO your strongest ground for requesting removal is the buyer coupling their feedback in this case with a previous adverse experience in another transaction, whether with you or another seller. I agree that this is an explicit breach of their policy. I would stick with this, and try again to get it removed. Good luck anyway!

[partsguysuk]

Thank you for your reply.

I can see how that would overwealm them for sure.

Think of it another way though. If you were building a case around a
criminal you would gather as much relevant evidence as possible that
relates to the law (policy) that it applies to.

I was just trying to have as much comprehensive evidence and then relate it
to what part of the policy applies to it.

Again, if a leadership agent can't make sense of that. I don't know what to
say?

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I really do appreciate it.