Pattern of Fraud? High-Value Items “Lost in Transit” – eBay Needs to Step In

[victoriangel85]

Hi all,

I wanted to raise an issue that’s becoming increasingly concerning, especially for buyers of high-value items like smartphones.

In recent weeks, I’ve had multiple transactions where sellers dispatch items via Royal Mail, only for the parcel to mysteriously go “missing in transit.” Tracking shows no movement, and sellers delay communication until a case is raised. I’m beginning to suspect this isn’t just bad luck - it may be part of a wider scam.

Here’s the pattern I’ve noticed:

• Item is sold (usually a phone or other high-value tech)
• The seller uses a standard Royal Mail service with no clear delivery confirmation
• Tracking stops updating shortly after dispatch
• Item is reported “lost”
• Buyer has to chase a refund through eBay
• (Possibly) the same phone is then listed again under a different seller name/account

If this is happening across multiple accounts, it could suggest fraud - a cycle where sellers are claiming loss, keeping the item, and reselling it.

My suggestion to eBay:

• Start requiring sellers of high-value items (especially tech) to upload the device’s serial number or IMEI before dispatch
• Serial numbers should be attached to the listing and verified if an item is reported lost or resold
• Track repeat “lost parcel” patterns across seller accounts and take stronger action where abuse is suspected

Buyers should not be repeatedly left out of pocket or in limbo while the same tricks are pulled. If you’re a buyer who’s experienced similar situations, please share your story here. The more voices we have, the more likely it is that eBay will look into it seriously.

[tobiasd4]

How can sellers benefit from this so called "Lost parcel"

If you don't receive an item & seller can't prove delivery by tracking, they have to refund buyer.

Seller may put same item up for sale again, but they still refunded original buyer.

[plpmr]

is it not a fact that if simple delivery is used eBay refund the buyer and the seller keeps the money they got?

[victoriangel85]

Thanks for your reply — I completely understand your point, and you’re right in saying that under eBay’s policy, the seller doesn’t receive the funds if they can’t prove delivery.

However, the concern I’ve raised is more about a loophole in the system, where a seller could potentially claim compensation from the courier (e.g. Royal Mail) for a “lost” item — even if the item was never actually sent or deliberately under-packaged to invite theft.

In that case:

• The buyer gets a refund via eBay (Money Back Guarantee),
• The seller receives a payout from Royal Mail,
• And the item can then be resold — potentially starting the same cycle again.

So technically, the seller hasn’t lost anything — they may have actually profited, depending on the courier’s insurance payout.

That’s why I think there needs to be more scrutiny for high-value items marked as “lost in transit,” especially when patterns emerge around similar types of listings. It’s not just about whether the buyer gets their money back — it’s about preventing repeated abuse of the system from multiple angles.

[victoriangel85]

Not quite — it’s a common misconception, so worth breaking down:

If a seller uses a non-tracked or basic delivery service, and the buyer claims they didn’t receive the item, eBay will usually side with the buyer under the Money Back Guarantee — because there’s no proof of delivery.

In that case:

• The buyer is refunded, either by the seller or by eBay.
• The seller doesn’t keep the eBay payment — the funds are either never released (if payment is still on hold) or reversed from their account if already processed.
• However, if the seller claims with the courier (like Royal Mail) that the item was lost, they can potentially receive a compensation payout (usually up to £100 depending on the service and if they insured the parcel).

So while eBay doesn’t let sellers keep your money directly, they could still walk away with compensation and resell the item, especially if it was never actually posted in the first place. That’s the loophole people are worried about — not that sellers are keeping your payment from eBay, but that they might be double-dipping: claiming loss, getting paid by the courier, and then relisting the same item.

[jckl1957]

'However, the concern I’ve raised is more about a loophole in the system, where a seller could potentially claim compensation from the courier (e.g. Royal Mail) for a “lost” item — even if the item was never actually sent or deliberately under-packaged to invite theft.'

Most sellers will at some time have tried to claim compensation from RM.  It is not straightforward or quick; you have to provide proof of posting and prove the value of the item sent, as well as showing you chose a service which offered sufficient compensation.

It would be impossible to make a claim unless you had actually sent the item.  Royal Mail would need your proof of posting, with date, weight, tracking number etc.  As this document is produced at a Post Office, a seller cannot fake it.

Then, I simply don't understand why a seller would under-package an item 'to invite theft'.  How would a seller benefit from an item being stolen during transit?

Genuinely, if I had  'multiple transactions where sellers dispatch items via Royal Mail, only for the parcel to mysteriously go missing in transit', I would stop buying online.

[john1297576]

I think a much simpler fraud, would be if buyer and seller colluded to sell a high value item, probably glass which arrives smashed. Unless ebay investigated properly and they certainly do not have a good history of doing this, a pile of old glass could be turned into a money spinner.

I have said this before, serial scammers will find a way of relieving ebay of money with phoney claims, using multiple accounts.

[tobiasd4]

If sellers are having multiple cases opened against them or claiming refunds,

ebay will take action eventually.