Buyer protection fee

[nostalgia.toys]

I understand that eBay has to make a profit but this is just not working. I am having to reduce my selling price by 4% to achieve the advertised price I am seeking, effectively a selling fee of 4%. Buyers seem to be staying away as I have only sold 2 items since this was imposed when I would normally have expected to sell 10-12 in that period.

I know other platforms use this system but they are selling relatively low value items. 4% of £20.00 would only be 80p but 4% of £200 would be £8.00, enough to put buyers off.

Are other private sellers finding a significant reduction in their turnover?

[moominlover]

Ebay have absolutely ruined their platform with continued bad decisions. Not only adding the buyer 'protection' (racket) fee, but now the mandatory introduction of 'simple delivery'. I have been a member for almost 25 years, and I have just deleted my listings as I just cannot be bothered anymore.

[the-nutwood-collection]

To be fair, I don't think the lack of impressions and sales can necessarily be attributed to the BPF.  Unfortunately for eBay, the launch has come at a time of market turbulence caused by events in the external environment.  The turbulence has been building up for a month, and maybe it would have been better to delay the launch, but I don't think they had any option but to plough on.

I've been looking at my sales for March, and it's not a pretty sight.  My main platform is down on impressions and sales, and so is my website.  More concerning is that direct orders from my business customers are down - which means that the dearth of sales is throughout the supply chain.  If they're not making the sales, I'm not making the sales.  One of my business customers has just taken a part-time job to plug the shortfall in income.  I didn't need to hear that.

The situation is such that I'm considering dropping my Ad Words campaigns - they're producing impressions and clicks, but not sales - a lot of looking, but no buying, just a whopping bill at the end of the month.  Big decision to make, I may be killing future sales if browsers are building a choice set of favourites and waiting for better times to purchase.

I thought that, when Covid was behind us, things would get better.  How wrong I was.

[andha-21]

"I don't follow the premise.

I couldn't choose before when the sellers charged me fees to buy their item?

And the difference now?"

I see where you are going but that's like going into a shop and complaining about their profit margins. There are things that are considered legally acceptable and then there are things that aren't.

The difference with BPF is it's advertised intended purpose. A buyer protection fee that covers items. 

We already have the money back guarantee. It's still there. If the item doesn't arrive as described or doesn't arrive period then the buyer is covered.

So that means the Money Back Guarantee covers buyers for their items. The same as BPF.

We already had CS chat and an available call centre.

So eBay are selling us a redundant second service. The free one already gives us the same protection/service.

The fact that those services are provided free by eBay is irrelevant. As soon as they chose to give them and decided to continue giving them they create a legal contract giving consumers rights with eBay on that basis. 

We don't have to claim using BPF if the MBG covers it.

& the fact that both have been in operation on applicable listings for the duration of this rollout so far means they have almost certainly been committing fraud.

So the BPF is like Dixons Group and similar making customers pay for the first year of warranty within their extended warranty programs. It was illegal & when they were finally caught, they were punished. 

As for the provision;

"Check what you should report to Trading Standards

You should report a business to Trading Standards if they sold you something:

unsafe or dangerous, like an electronic appliance with faulty wiring or food past its use-by date

fake

not as described - for example, you bought a package holiday but something advertised wasn’t included

you didn’t want to buy - for example, they put pressure on you"

The last point covers it. Though there's probably an angle for the third point too.

[clavdivs05]

Absolutely 100% agree.... I have sold one thing since the fee was introduced. I have had long chats with ebay and they just don't get it. They keep saying it doesn't effect sellers..... I keep repeating it does, because it loses us a sale. I still maintain 4% is too much and if they insist on having a fee it should be 2% flat rate. BUT, I've also suggested that the fee be optional to those buyers who want the protection. At the checkout it can be offered and the buyer could either opt in or out out. That would suit everyone much better.

[*devils.advocate*]

You keep repeating it and repeating it - so, let us know how you get on with Trading Standards.

The reply from them will be an interesting read.

If you're not prepared to do something about it yourself ...........................

[cassidy_r_private]

Aimed at no-one in particular.

BPF - just see it for what it is (final value fees). It seems to be working for Vinted so ebay copied them. Quelle surprise. eBay pay their marketing strategists to copy other firms' models.

Adjust prices to allow for the fee. eBay helpfully shows you what a buyer is charged so work backwards from your chosen price point, ie, if you want your buyer to see £29.99 then list it at £28.12. You could even make a little table and stick it to the edge of your monitor.

Stop worrying and ranting about things you cannot change. Life's too short. Move on.

[andha-21]

The reason I'm saying/repeating it is because it allows others to make a choice for themselves.

Trading Standards will accept the complaint but if they get similar complaints from more than 1 person it will change their interest levels.

If you and certain others want to continue the way you are, fine. But you aren't the only people here and others may find it useful.

If you don't like it/ignore it.

[*devils.advocate*]

Well, if anyone is going to take up your suggestion, they’ll have to remember to approach them as a buyer, not a seller.

It has nothing to do with any seller whatsoever.

Anyone who does take it forward , it’ll be brilliant if they’ll post the outcome.

Will you?

[andha-21]

Sellers can be buyers too.

In fact, many are.

As for what I've already done or plan to do, that's my business. 

The community eBay account looks like it is legal department. If they can respond in that manner to workarounds so quickly and efficiently it means they could respond to other things too.

As they haven't chosen to do it with any of my posts that only really leaves 2 possibilities. Either they think my posts are worthless and without merit or it's a discussion they don't want to have.

But if it's the former why don't they just make use of the forum provisions regarding libellous comments?

If I'm wrong, it would be easy for them to shut me up.

They haven't....

[*devils.advocate*]

Ah well, the 'bullets' have been made - love to see, and hear from, who's the first to fire them.

[theelench]

Apologies,  wrong context!

I should have read all of the comment you replied to before writing.

[theelench]

I didn't know there was a thing called "phenomenology".

But said more or less the same thing on the "February Sales Dead ...." (BSB)

Drawing attention to a 'new' fee at this time wasn't very clever to say the least.  What buyers didn't see they didn't care about.  Now they see it they get annoyed, even if it's slightly less than what they paid before when the fees were hidden.

[zoomingmouse]

Reply to @nostalgia.toys 

I have also reduced my prices to take the price back to where it was before the added buyer fee. 

However, the buyer still sees a fee regardless.  

I’ve not sold anything since it’s been introduced, but that's not unusual these days for me.

I've also barely had any views or watchers.

As a buyer I resent the fee & feel insulted by how it's been implimented & 'sold' like it's something new & fantastic.

It's killed auctions & I won't pay an extra 75p per item especially when I'm buying multiples from one seller, nor will I pay 5 x postage.  

As a private seller I've already taken the hit.

I won't do the same also as a buyer as I don't accept that I get anything for it.

[the-nutwood-collection]

Giving the buyer the option to opt out is a good idea, but it would have unwelcome consequences.

eBay would have to include the MBG in the opt out, otherwise there would be no point.  My guess is that the majority of buyers would opt out  so, without the MBG, their only recourse would be to make a claim on the seller via the small claims court - and this would cause reputational harm to eBay.

eBay could reasonably respond to the media that the buyer had refused insurance, but that wouldn't stop the media making a story of it.  I have seen numerous press articles dissing EVRi for only paying out £20 when the sender didn't pay extra to adequately cover the value of the item.  The article never mentions that extra cover was available at a cost, and the financial loss is the sender's fault.  

I don't take extra cover when I send an item but, if it's lost, I take the hit.  I reckon that the money saved over time adequately covers the loss of a few parcels.  Unfortunately, most buyers won't think this way - they haven't got the item, or it's not as described, and they want their money back pronto.  This is why eBay introduced the MBG.

[deba3602013]

"Private sellers are supposed to be small scale entities selling personal items and for those people I still feel they are getting a good service and BPF shouldn't be a concern - as I said, most of the alternatives to Ebay wouldn't be free. What I do see though is people who are clearly not in the category of a private seller bemoaning the BPF fees; even in some instances going so far as to say how it's going to hurt their 'business'. If you are running a business and eBay is essential to the sustainability of that business then you should probably pay for a business account and factor that into your overheads and BPF need not concern you."

I think it's odd to be charging the Buyer anything.   The charge should be to the Seller who in turn would just incorporate the fees into their pricing and who is the wiser.  By that I mean when I go into a bricks and mortar shop, all the stuff in there will be priced to take into account all the costs that go into having the premises and all that goes with that.  I don't go into the shop and see a price of £10 and then when I go to pay find out that I have to pay £12.50, an additional £2.50  to make up for the shop's running costs.  People in this thread have pointed that out already and I apologize for not having responded directly to them.

For the people on here posing as Private sellers when they are actually Business sellers, are they ignorant of the fact that they should be paying for a business account?  If so, why is this the case?  How could eBay remedy this situation?

This is where AI could be of some actual use to eBay. 

There is not a time that goes by when I am browsing for something that I don't discover private sellers who are actually making a business of it.  Blatantly selling brand new items and they have an endless supply of a particular item.  Some even make a point of mentioning in their description they can make things to order or even suggest contacting someone in their 'sales team'  to assist them. 

I've seen telephone numbers and email addresses listed.   Hint, hint.

Is it really that dificult to find a programmer to write an app to find this stuff?  Surely not.  So why isn't it done?   IF > Then > ...

This is where the fees to Sellers comes in and levels out the game between Private and Business sellers.  For those who eBay can't manage to weed out for whatever reason, they (Seller) will still be contributing something.

And bring back the Cash on Collection option.   I've  just discovered that's not allowed any more.  That doesn't feel right. 

Is the six-digit code that is supposed to be entered into wherever it goes to confirm pick up a fool-proof method?  Would it be possible for a buyer to have purchased two items:  One is worth £5 and the other item purchased is £150.  Would it be possible for the buyer to give the code for the cheaper item to the person they're collecting the more expensive item from and then just abandon the £5 order? 

If Sellers were back to paying fees and they had a cash on collection and then refused to give ebay its share, then they get their account cancelled.  Are there really that many dishonest people out there?

Ebay's decision to start charging Buyers  is par for the upside-down inside-out world course we have now found ourselves in.  It's as crazy as it gets.  Surely y'all are noticing how strange things are, yes?

[andha-21]

"Is the six-digit code that is supposed to be entered into wherever it goes to confirm pick up a fool-proof method? Would it be possible for a buyer to have purchased two items: One is worth £5 and the other item purchased is £150. Would it be possible for the buyer to give the code for the cheaper item to the person they're collecting the more expensive item from and then just abandon the £5 order?"

I'd never thought of that but your reasoning is sound.

eBay would just turn round and say it was the sellers fault anyway.

But yes, you'd have to be very careful with that.

"If Sellers were back to paying fees and they had a cash on collection and then refused to give ebay its share, then they get their account cancelled. Are there really that many dishonest people out there?"

Sorry, I don't know how many employees eBay have .. 😝

[buffster1963]

I think the code is specific to the order so in that case the £5 code would not work for the £150 order.    

[the-nutwood-collection]

... even if it's slightly less than what they paid before when the fees were hidden.

If they've purchased before, they probably don't remember what they paid.  The worst case is that they assume it was the cost before the BPF was added, and therefore it's gone up in price by 4% + 75p - and the 75p is a killer on a low-value item.  It would have been better to increase the percentage to 5% and not have a fixed fee.

[vintique*violet]

Ebay's decision to start charging Buyers  is par for the upside-down inside-out world course we have now found ourselves in.  It's as crazy as it gets.  Surely y'all are noticing how strange things are, yes?

Yes, to the upside down world, on many levels...

Imagine, everything controlled , monitored,  no cash available, everything digital, privacy removed and all and sundry have access to take a " peek" and decide what you can do, buy, sell, travel, say, eat etc...Not so "strange" when the truth of that is being played out, worldwide, right in our faces. 

[lucy_farmer]

'For the people on here posing as Private sellers when they are actually Business sellers, are they ignorant of the fact that they should be paying for a business account?  If so, why is this the case?  How could eBay remedy this situation?'

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, up until fairly recently, I'd have said that pseudo-private sellers were certainly around, but not an enormous problem..... now I know how wrong I was!

(possibly the 'no fees few months' at the end of last year got a lot more of 'em to join up and take advantage?)

But what was also a suprise was the amount of  'private' sellers popping up on these boards quite openly and innocently stating what they were up to.

This would imply that they had no idea that what they were doing was wrong.  And to be honest that's not entirely suprising.

Ebay haven't just been ignoring sellers on the wrong account, they have been actively encouraging it.

Offering private sellers, thousands of listings (up until recently anyway) offering 'out of stock' options (to sellers who aren't even supposed to 'stock' in the first place) offering multi-buy listings, and offering 'shops'.

 Some people (who've never thought about distance-selling regulations or consumer law in their life) would just assume that having a shop was a good enough indicator of the fact they were running a small business.

And ebay have *never* put them straight on that.

So I'm not suprised to see some of them get a bit shirty when they end up here to be told they're in the wrong.

(mind you, some of them 'double down' so hard on pretending to be genuine private sellers, it would be quite funny 😂.... if it wasn't such a blatent p take out of real business sellers)

Ebay's bots are red-hot at spotting contact details being exchanged between private sellers and potential buyers, so I've always wondered why on earth they can't get a program that just spots the words 'brand new' multiple times on a private accounts listings.

Or spots the fact that a private seller is flogging loads of 'consumables' which are logically impossible to sell second hand.

Or selling loads of brand new clothes/shoes etc all in different sizes....

But up until now, I don't reckon ebay have given a flying fart about what account sellers were on; after all, when all account paid fees, all accounts made money!

( I think ebay are starting to worry about it *now*, thanks to the up and coming sharing of info with the HMRC , but that's a whole other subject!)