Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

I recently sold a watch that happened to mention in the description that the receipt was included as part of the sale, along with booklets and the original warranty card.
I packaged everything, including the receipt, which was placed inside a Watches of Switzerland booklet, and sent it for Authentication. As always, I made a video of my packaging process, right up to sticking the label on the package, clearly showing everything that was included in the package and the condition of the watch.
The watch passed through authentication and was delivered to the buyer, who contacted me to say that although he was very happy with the watch he did not receive the receipt. I immediately sent him a PDF copy of the receipt together with the video footage of me packaging the paper version.
Regardless he raised a return request on the basis that what he received did not match the description. I was concerned that something untoward was happening, so I immediately contacted ebay to tell them that I had packaged the original receipt and that I had video footage of doing so. I explained that I had sent a PDF copy and the video footage to the buyer and sent ebay a copy of the PDF. I explained that I couldn’t see where I could attach the video footage. I was advised that I’d be contacted prior to the outcome of the Return request. After a 4 week delay, without any explanation and without contacting me at all, Ebay accepted the return.

I appealed immediately I was notified that the return was accepted. The so called "Appeal" process consisted of a phone call from an Ebay representative who then transferred me to the Authenticators.

I tried to explain that it was the Authenticators decision I was appealing against but was transferred anyway.

When I got through to the Authenticator dept. I asked how the watch passed authentication if it didn't match the description, I was told that the receipt would not have formed part of the Authentication process.

I pointed out that the Authenticators are supposed to ensure that the item matches the description in all aspects to avoid this very situation, and as the lack of receipt was the single reason for the return, clearly a mistake had been made during Authentication. I was told that it would be impossible to check every piece of paper included in all the packages they receive. I then asked, how could they be so sure that the receipt wasn't in the package I sent if they didn’t check everything and was told that CCTV footage had been used. I explained that the receipt was in the WoS booklet and could have therefore been missed and that I had my own video footage of the packaging. (Freeze frame of my video is attached here). I requested the opportunity to compare their footage with mine and was told that this would not be possible for security reasons. I offered to send my footage for consideration, but this was also refused for no apparent reason. I pointed out that in any dispute, it is normal and correct for all sides to be allowed to provide their own evidence and interrogate counter evidence. The representative went on to say that this was not a dispute, but a return request. Even though he’d called it a dispute throughout our conversation. I told him that I was disputing the outcome but was told that unless I had anything further to add he was closing the appeal. I tried to argue that this could not possibly be the whole Appeal process and requested details on how to escalate the dispute. I was told that his decision was now final, and no escalation was offered.

I’ve now had money deducted from a different account but have not received the watch as I am on holiday.

I do not want to accept this return as, firstly, I won’t get back exactly what I sent Ebay and secondly,the watch has been out of my possession for 4 weeks, nearly 6 by the time I get home, and I have no faith that the Authenticators have checked the watch correctly.

 

I really can't comprehend that in this day and age there would be this level of arrogance and unaccountability. As a Seller we pay a fee to Ebay for a service, which includes Authentication. If that service is faulty or lacking in integrity there must be a statutory and transparent complaints process that doesn't start and finish with the same entity you are complaining about.

 

Ebay’s own Authentication T & Cs clearly state:

“The Authentication Partner will inspect the item within two (2) business days of receipt at the facility and the authenticated item will then be sent to the buyer as soon as possible. This check will include inspection of the watch for authenticity, and for accuracy against the item listing.

 

- In which case how did they Authenticate the watch and contents if they didn’t find the receipt? They clearly didn’t check the package I sent them thoroughly and would not have any real idea if the receipt was contained or not. CCTV could not pick up a receipt that was placed in a booklet.

 

“eBay assumes the delivery risk from the Authentication Partner to the buyer and any items lost or damaged at the Authentication Partner facility.”

-I have video footage that the receipt was included so, if the buyer did not receive it, it must surely have been lost in authentication.

So, my question is where do I go next with this?

There must be complaints process, but the Ebay website appears almost deliberately obscure when I look. Every click seems to take you back to the “Contact Us” page.

 

Is there a high level escalation that I can follow?

 

Is there an external body that I can go to, such as an ombudsman?

 

Has anyone had a similar experience?

 

I look forward to hearing from someone.

Message 1 of 44
See Most Recent
43 REPLIES 43

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

My experience with AGS has not been good, I have no fiath in them. I also believe the issue is with Authenticity, not the buyer, I think they lost the receiptand broke the bezel protevtor.
There doesn't appear to be any route to raise a dispute woth them.



Sent from Samsung Mobile on O2
Message 21 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

I sold an Omega , it was nos in immaculate condition no issues . It went to the authenticators and they reported the bracelet had scratches and it wasn't as described . The buyer cancelled and I received the watch back from the authenticators . It was a Chronograph and I was horrified at what came back ! A bent and damaged pusher , marks on the bracelet and case and it wasn't working . I then became embroiled in a disagreement which eventually with all my evidence and honesty they saw sense and we agreed a compensation amount to cover repairs . 
They said they had cctv coverage of openining the watch which didn't materialise after continually asking for and they never mentioned the fact the watch wasn't working ! This didn't say much for the authenticators !
My advice and experience is to be very careful when selling high end watches on EBay .

Message 22 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

Take civil action against eBay UK, and take them to the small claims court, as they have broken their own T&Cs, moreover they have authenticated the product and contents, then back track on their own authentication, for eBay to then back track on their own authentication "Not possible to check all" is basically ignorance, and we all know in the UK there is no defence for ignorance, the fault lies with eBay.

 

I would go to MCOL "Money claims online" and take civil action against eBay, you have 6 years from date of transaction with eBay Authentication programme. 

 

Best of Luck.

 

Message 23 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

Your wrong, as this is the whole point of the eBay authentication programme, to prevent these instances, clearly eBay is floored and continues to live up its name FLEABAY, and is a comedy show of errors, the customer service team are script readers that lack basic common sense when dealing with the eBay community, this is why Amazon is the way to go!

eBay milks for the same thing over and over again.

1) Top rated - perks / promoted rankings within search results
2) Top rated Plus same as above (1)
3) Now they bring out a paid promoted listing that points (1 & 2) are meant to provide.

eBay community smell the coffee, until you take a stand as a united community, eBay will continue its ruthlessness tactics.

the above is my thoughts on the mater.

Message 24 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

@twdservice, sorry to hear about your damaged watch and glad that you got a resolution in your favour. How did you get eBay to accept your evidence? As you'll see from my post, I was never given the opportunity to show my evidence or present my case.

Message 25 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

Thanks for taking an interest, and your comments.

Taking a civil action against eBay sounds great, I'd love to do it. But what exactly would I be claiming for?
A lost sale, a lost receipt and a broken plastic bezel protector. How can anyone place a value on those?
I’m not really sure I can make a claim for just rank poor service?

 

Looks like @twdservice had some joy. Although they at least had something quantifiable to claim for.

Judging by what I've had to go through I can't imagine it would have been an easy process. It would be good to hear the details of how they challenged eBay successfully.

 

 

Message 26 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

Anyone got any experience or a heads up when the buyer has purchased said AG watch waits a week states not as described but removes security tag? Reading FAQs and T&Cs removal of said Tag voids a return? He took a picture of watch and sent to me prior to his return (which after 3 days he still has not sent back) so have evidence of such, and several grand sitting doing nothing as case and my money is on hold.

Message 27 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

As far as dealing with Ebay , I pushed..  and the overwhelming evidence of what I sent, the pictures in the listing and the condition it arrived back with me . Quite obviously I was hardly likely to offer for sale a non functioning and damaged watch and describe it as New Old Stock  which would go through authentication and then be  sent back me wasting everyones time , who would do that ?! They themselves sent a watch back with bracelet damage and the sale pictures in the listing clearly showed no damage. Combined with the damaged pusher and it was non functioning meant they couldnt really argue any further .

Message 28 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

What are the details of the buyers INAD claim, and are you in agrement and happy to accept the return? You haven't said.

I can't be certain, but if the INAD is not watch related, the tag removal might not help you.

 

Message 29 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

I thought the whole point of the AG scheme was that the item was authentic and exactly as described in the listing.  If so, how can a buyer claim INAD?  A return I can understand - don't like it, doesn't fit - but not an INAD.

Just asking out of curiosity.  

Message 30 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

I would have thought that it would be the same as on .com where an authenticated item can only be returned if the seller offers free returns or accepts the return.

 

It seems we have a rather more pointless watered down authentication service here in the UK.

 

This is the sort of thread that cries out for an eBay rep to comment on. It would give them a break from the Nectar posts.

Message 31 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

Ebay seemed to have changed their wording for AG watches since it's launch in the UK; I was under the belief the AG was to do away with INAD claims dressed up from spending £000's on a watch with the inevitable (for many) of Buyer's  Remorse. I am not a Trader I stated No Returns (which does it appears carry some weight in the decision making process)

 

The buyer is scratching around attempting to get an INAD claim, Authenticator seems to allow any such returns and an automatic return to them. The watch Security Tag is specifically given as an example of no returns/void if removed in the description of how AG actually works. The buyer has taken a picture of said watch minus the Tag so having owned and worn it for a week now wishes a return. Beggars belief in my view I am not offering a try before you buy sale, nor do I wish someone wearing and perhaps worse my £4K watch and to return it on a whim.

 

It would appear it all rests with the Authenticator, eBay CS have been friendly and listened to my diatribe but appear as other poster's have intimated to be led by the Authenticator and sit on the fence, with no Appeal system etc. It would seem you need to evidence your side verbally over the phone to them to record your views/objections for when the watch is actually re-examined

 

They have given the buyer 10 days to return the watch then case will close; sold a Tudor last year no issues, this has bitten and shows it relies on the integrity of the buyer; given some of the Charlatan's on eBay that is a risk I don't wish to ever take again.

Message 32 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

I tend to agree with you about the security tag. The buyer should check that the item is as described before they break it. 

However, you've still not told us what part of the sale was not as described. It really helps if you can put as much detail as possible into these threads so we can get a clear picture of what's gone on. The buyer must have given a reason for the return request to have even been considered.

Message 33 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

The INAD derives from a discrepency with the eBay pull-down template listing of the watch stating the crystal is Sapphire when it is not, however said watch was never supplied with a Sapphire crystal. This was coupled with the buyer requesting items not listed or even supplied with said year of watch by the manufacturer and then an attempt to discredit the AG process altogether. I guess the perils of selling on eBay which basically allows scope for fraud, buyer's remorse and a try before you buy for up to 30 days service......don't like it, bit short of cash now don't worry just return it for a refund....and with total control of the process including ability to remove finances from bank accounts.  So now 2 weeks after the sale, seller a week after receiving the watch states INAD, security tag has been removed, watch has yet to been returned to Authenticator, £4K on hold, after my chase up seller now has 4 days to return to Authenticator via a pre-paid return; if not case closed. 

Message 34 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

"The INAD derives from a discrepency with the eBay pull-down template listing of the watch stating the crystal is Sapphire when it is not, however said watch was never supplied with a Sapphire crystal."

 

So the buyer has a valid case then as the listing was inaccurate.   No seller should rely on what ebay puts in a listing for them, they even agree when listing when that they are wholly responsible for the accuracy of the listing.

 

However, that does not excuse what seems to be negligence and poor service from the authenticators.   Both buyers and sellers frequently complain about them on here. 

Message 35 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

Yep I understand the issue, in the purest form the ebay listing template was incorrect, I failed to spot that thinking it would be accurate and the AG process as a gatekeeper for buyer/seller to check such then allowed that too?!

 

I am however relying on the security tag removal as the decider given the specific eBay wording of the AG process especially given the possible implications of such for a watch, the fact the supposed issue wasn't flagged by fhe buyer for 8 days after sale, fact buyer was asking for items not listed or even supplied when purchased. Authenticator seems to determine how this will proceed and CS will follow their script; far easier and less hassle for eBay to void the sale return item and return funds, I am guessing. 

 

I will not be selling anything again in the future on eBay, the previous listing for same watch had a non-payment buyer which held it in limbo for 10+ days too; eBay is now far too expensive (if paying full fees) and far too volatile/subjective to warrant the 'risk' of transacting.

 

Message 36 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

Although they do have a case, it seems a bit picky on the buyers part. Would be interested to know what the watch was. You'd imagine that the buyer might have researched and known that the watch was never supplied with Saphire crystal.

Nevertheless, this discrepancy should have definately been picked up by the AG process. They can't argue that it was not within their remit to check it. 

They seem to make a lot of mistakes, but because they're the arbiters in any dispute, they are essentially unaccountable. So they'll always get away with it.

Message 37 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

I read these type of post with dread as the world of retail get ever more complicated ..  however I’m a strong advocate for the courts particularly Ombudsman, in the case the FCA 

since we do pay to recieve a fair and equitable service from  a proportion of our fees..  

 

Reading through the OP  and thread, it appears to me the eBay appeal process is flawed, and may have options in consumer law to follow up.. and good news coming into law January 2024 we will be seeing the new “Consumer duty.. “ and this is something perhaps we could use to make eBay more accountable. 

 

https://www.fca.org.uk/firms/consumer-duty

 

We need representation,   EBay need to hear us, no longer can it be a one way street.. all cases are different, but unless we are properly heard we cannot let go and learn from our mistakes.. or protect out ‘livelihoods’  Ebay is a finiancial service, registered as such..  FS industries are changing.. they must be help accountable. 

 

 

“No person, I think, ever saw a herd of buffalo, of which a few were fat and the great majority lean. No person ever saw a flock of birds, of which two or three were swimming in grease, and the others all skin and bone.”
– Henry George
Message 38 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

Sorry I have messed the settings up on the forum and dont get any notifications when people reply to me.

 

Did you ever get this sorted or is it still an ongoing issue? Since this conversation I've had 4 pairs of trainers come back clearly worn that they've passed as brand new, thankfully a lot less value but a few pictures (some that the buyer even posted on the return) and I've had a label and a refund from eBay.

 

I've also got the email address of the CEO if you are stuck in a never ending cycle without it getting sorted, you obviously dont speak to Jamie at eBay but they claim he has read it and passed it onto the executive escalation team.

Message 39 of 44
See Most Recent

Authenticity Guarantee - Totally unaccountable and appeal process is Not Fit For Purpose

Hi @pg_kicks

Sounds like you've had a tough time of it, but at least it looks like you've had some success.

As with my case sadly, no, I never got an acceptable resolution.

The watch was eventually returned in the same condition, but without the receipt and with a broken bezel protector.

I did raise an "item not returned in original condition" dispute, but received no response from ebay.

As both of these items were difficult to put a value on, and I've subsequently sold the watch for £175 less, I've reluctantly decided to just let it go.

I'm still extremely angry with the way my "appeal", if you can call it that, was handled and that the money was clawed back from my account before Authenticity had even received the watch back. This shambles of a process is  autocratic and shamelessly unaccountable.

I wouldn't mind getting the contact email for the CEO as I'd really like to let him know how bad the situation has become.

 

Message 40 of 44
See Most Recent
Got selling related questions? Start here: