Business operating as private sellers

[jay2750]

I think this is the one instance where naming and shaming should be allowed. 

At the very minimum it gives them the right to reply.

Sure, there will be the odd stamp collector who is private that those defending this practice always trot out,

but's let face it we all see plenty of stuff from blatant business sellers registered as private individuals.

I sell in low value item categories mostly under £10 including delivery.  I have to compete with these people, competition is fine, unfair competition I'm finding is increasingly not.

If they were named and shamed, then we could all go have a look at their listings, report them, then when Ebay see many multiple reports against a single seller they MAY just take action.

[crofthousevintage]

>..................

[4_bathrooms]

---

@jay2750 wrote:

If they were named and shamed, then we could all go have a look at their listings, report them, then when Ebay see many multiple reports against a single seller they MAY just take action.

---

If you're so intent on reporting them why don't you spend your time and efforts reporting them to the body that is supposed to deal with them? Just find an item they have for sale, Google "<item location> trading standards" and fill in the relevant online form for purchases made in the area that particular TS department covers.

They'll probably fob the complaint(s) off to Citizens Advice - who won't do anything as you're not reporting in the capacity of an affected consumer - but you could always name and shame the TS departments that aren't doing their job properly to their relevant Local Authorities. Let's face it - eBay aren't going to do anything unless TS makes them do it but TS are now so poorly funded they barely exist let alone can they afford to do their jobs properly.

[iew-signed-books]

I agree with you 100% - but it ain't goin' to happen.

[plpmr]

eBay won't allow naming & shaming on the boards for obvious reasons, including the need to vet such postings - I've seen so many such posts that were incorrect.

Fine that you want others to be able to look at their listings to check out if they are complying with eBay rules and the law, but we cannot do that with you as you are not posting from your business seller account.

Sure you can report sellers trading illegally to eBay, why not report them to HMRC and trading standards?

[insidethe93]

"it gives them the right to reply" - that's if they know they've been named, and assuming they want to engage publicly, and it might simply be one person's word against another. (The ancient Egyptians' judicial court was perceptively called The Hall of Two Truths.)

If it's one person's word against another's, by doing it in public you'd be inviting readers to take sides, and that could be based solely on trivial and irrelevant reasons e.g. someone's politeness or lack of or some bad spelling.

You could end up trashing someone's reputation or self-trashing your own. You could soon get into the area, even if grey, of libel. No, for detailed cases, contact eBay customer services.

Anyway, if we went down the 'name and shame' route, I expect eBay would close the Discussion Boards quite quickly, to avoid the risk.

[lemon-p]

Naming and shaming on the boards is out of order and should never be allowed, if you have to do it then do it properly through the proper channels.

I had an occasion where a seller who was clearly a business seller.(which I know for a fact and not guesswork) tried to screw me over.

I bought a low value item from the seller, and it tuned out to be faulty, so I opened a Nad case and ebay told me to contact the sellers for a return label, which I did, and all I received was insults and abuse, with insinuations that I was a cheat and a scammer.

So out of character I reported all their policy violations in their listings (5) to ebay and also reported them to their local Trading Standards for trading illegally who acknowledged my complaint and soon after that the seller was no longer registered.

I have nothing against people making a little money on the side as long as they don't try and screw me, or anyone else, over, if they do they will regret it, diddling the tax man is none of my concern but diddling me is.

[nebs9999]

I wonder if eBay are guilty of money laundering, as they take payment for these businesses and then pass it on to them, without doing any due dilligence whatsoever. If they aren't registered on here as a business then I doubt if many of them are registered with the tax authorities. There are so many people doing it that, if ebay were found guilty, the fine would be massive.

[litp*records]

---

@nebs9999 wrote:

I wonder if eBay are guilty of money laundering, as they take payment for these businesses and then pass it on to them, without doing any due dilligence whatsoever. If they aren't registered on here as a business then I doubt if many of them are registered with the tax authorities. There are so many people doing it that, if ebay were found guilty, the fine would be massive.

---

I was having this conversation with another business seller before... I argued that, it would not only be the "fake private" sellers getting into hot water but Ebay themselves for allowing it.

AFAIK Ebay only cracks down on fake private sellers when they're approaching the VAT threshold ie. Turning over 85k over a rolling 12 month period (or with 85k of stock listed).

Ebay is allowing these people to trade illegally even if they are registered with HMRC for self-assessment tax, they are breaking consumer law by denying customers their legal rights (eg. Displaying of their physical address, allowing change of mind returns within 14 days min., ensuring items are durable and fit for purpose, etc..)

I see 100s of such sellers every day just from casually searching ebay.  

Genuine private sellers should really not be allowed to list more than a few items a week, should not be allowed to sell brand new items and certainly not have multiple variation/quantity listings.

Those who consider buying to resell or making to sell a hobby, well I got news for ya, in the eyes of the law it's actually a business.  If anyone has doubts then look up "Badges of Trading" on the HMRC website.

[4_bathrooms]

---

@nebs9999 wrote:

I wonder if eBay are guilty of money laundering, as they take payment for these businesses and then pass it on to them, without doing any due dilligence whatsoever. 

---

eBay perform the "know your customer" checks on all sellers once they hit a certain threshold as eBay is required to comply with the Money Laundering Regulations.

---

@nebs9999 wrote:

If they aren't registered on here as a business then I doubt if many of them are registered with the tax authorities. 

---

HMRC collates data from all eBay UK's sales via a supercomputer called Connect. Every few years (like this year) they do a big clampdown on eBay sellers who should have been declaring their trading income but were not. Note that HMRC only cares about undeclared income; they do not care if a seller is a business illegally trading via a private account provided they are declaring their income. Checking business sellers are correctly registered is beyond HMRC's remit and is Trading Standards' job to police (which they don't).  

[toomanyparrots4]

What's the big deal?  Registering as a business changes nothing, apart from lowering your Ebay fees.  Being a "business seller" on Ebay is nothing to do with taxes or the companies register.  It's just a meaningless Ebay label.

[4_bathrooms]

---

@toomanyparrots4 wrote:

Registering as a business changes nothing, apart from lowering your Ebay fees. 

---

In most cases registering as a business seller increases your selling fees. Especially if the seller regularly recieves one of those "80% off final valuation fees" offers which are the sole preserve of private sellers.

---

@toomanyparrots4 wrote:

Being a "business seller" on Ebay is nothing to do with taxes or the companies register.  It's just a meaningless Ebay label.

---

It isn't. It is a specific (criminal) offence under the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations for a trader to masquerade as a private seller. That's actually more serious than the offences such a trader is committing under the Consumer Rights Act and the Consumer Contracts Regulations. A consumer purchasing from such a trader actually has more rights enshrined in law than if they purchased from a correctly registered trader.

Note that a "trader" is any business including sole traders; it has nothing to do with being an incorporated business. 

[toomanyparrots4]

I can't understand your legalese.  The point is, if a buyer buys from a "private" seller they don't lose any important rights rather than buying from a "business" seller.  You seem confused, you're stating the buyer has more rights from a private trader, so again, what harm is done to who?

[papso22]

One of the points is that a business trading on a private ebay account can select 'no returns'; while that means nothing if you look at the bigger legal picture, it does mean that they can't use ebay to return something for a refund.  They also don't have any contact details to use to enforce their legal rights, and a very much uphill struggle to get a refund outside of ebay.

The failure to show contact details, and a legal returns policy, is what gives buyer's the right of return for any reason, at the seller's cost, for 12 months, but again, that will be almost impossible to enforce for exactly the same reason as they are given that right in the first place, i.e no contact details.

Buyer's legal rights become almost impossible to enforce when a seller breaks the law, it's a catch 22 situation.

And then there is all the harm done to properly registered business sellers who are in competition with the illegal trader, who gets free listings, special offers, and doesn't have to accept returns.

[toomanyparrots4]

Whatever the sales figure or whatever makes it a requirement to be a business seller, why doesn't Ebay just detect that and change your account?

As a buyer I most certainly can return a faulty item to anyone.  If not, Ebay would be full of people selling broken stuff without taking it back.  It's the same procedure for business or private sellers.  "Return item", wait for seller to do something about it, if they don't then escalate to Ebay.

What is this 12 months you're talking about?  There is no 12 months anywhere in law.  If you buy a TV from Currys, you can return it in 6 months if it's broken.  After that you have to prove negligence in the manufacture of it.

Business sellers get lower fees, it's why I changed, not because I was supposed to.

[rainbowtrax]

They're talking about change of mind returns, not faulty goods. And the law gives buyers the right to return for any reason for 12 months if it's a distance sale and the business is not legally compliant. It's nothing to do with faulty or damaged returns.

Business sellers don't get lower fees any more due to the unlimited free listings given to private sellers.

[toomanyparrots4]

Why would you buy something you didn't want?  And as you just said, the buyer can still do it with a private seller.

What are these unlimited free listings?  I never used to get those.  Just googled it and found nothing but x free listings per month, which applies also to business sellers.

[4_bathrooms]

---

@toomanyparrots4 wrote:

I can't understand your legalese.  The point is, if a buyer buys from a "private" seller they don't lose any important rights rather than buying from a "business" seller.  

---

They lose their legal right to a remorse (i.e. change of mind) return. Also, private sellers are not required to ensure durable items they sell are of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose nor last a reasonable length of time - the item only has to be "as described". If a consumer has a problem with a purchase from a business they have 6 years (5 years in Scotland) to enforce their consumer rights which they don't have when purchasing from a private seller.

---

@toomanyparrots4 wrote:

You seem confused, you're stating the buyer has more rights from a private trader

---

No, I'm not. I'm stating a consumer has more rights when they purchase from a business seller masquerading as a private seller. If the consumer can prove the seller is a business that misrepresented themself their short-term right to cancel under the Consumer Contracts Regulations is extended from 14 days to 12 months.  

[iew-signed-books]

Not a meaningless label, I'm afraid, but the law (again).

[zoomingmouse]

Unless it was a glitch, the last couple of private sellers I bought off had their dispatch address/contact details given in the Ebay confirmation email, which is something I had not noticed before.

I checked my own account & my address & phone number were entered too in the dispatch address.

Maybe the reasons you mention are behind this as I can't see any other reason for giving out this information.