Ebay's new Buyers' protection fee from the 4th Feb

[rsbrickshop]

I'm a private seller. Items I sell are between £2.90 - £10. Is It just me or will ebay's new Buyers' protection fee from the 4th Feb make it near impossible to sell competitively. A few months ago Ebay got rid of Sellers' fees for private sellers, which was a welcome move. But this new change and getting rid of multi-buy discount for private sellers will make it worse than it was with the original fees.

[ricwat-3243]

Why would they publish anything, there would only be people selling stuff - no differentiation between business or private, no 'shop's or any of that (just categories, as now, for those listing lots of stuff) - that's how it all started. Tax and VAT would be nothing to do with eBay at all, since eBay would have no way of knowing who's a business or not. 

[*devils.advocate*]

It's nothing to do with tax, VAT, eBay, eBid, Amazon etc, etc, or anything in that line.

Try researching Consumer Regulations - an entirely separate thing.

See what Businesses must do - and what you then propose genuine private sellers would be forced to do - somewhat unwillingly.

[vintique*violet]

Businesses and private individuals are totally separate entities.  Businesses have to comply with consumer law and legislation whether bricks and mortar or online sales. 

eBay as a business also have legal compliance to adhere to.

Private individuals are just that - Private and should remain so. 

[sammylou40]

Likely not.  But why do you need it?

you can see which area they are in before buying and you are provided with their address if you need a return.  
there’s no need for the information other than that 

[lucy_farmer]

'But why do you need it?'

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

Because UK Consumer law says so.

Having your contact details/address etc on your listings, is just one of the rules you have to stick to, in order to comply with consumer law.

(It's got nothing to do with collection or returns etc.)

[dch2112011]

From my understanding of what is required of a sole trader / simple partnership you are supposed to  if you're carrying on e-commerce (selling goods via the internet)  display a “geographic address at which the service provider is established”. (Potentially an address service or virtual address might suffice)

This should not be confused with a limited company or LLP  who have different rules.

However on saying this many sole traders do not want to display their home address for safety concerns eg if you were female or to protect family for example.

The reason simply is for a customer to communicate - which begs the question what would happen if a sole trader did not display their home address - especially as ebay disclose username and address to buyers when completing the purchase.

in reality nothing unless a customer or customers complained that they could not contact the trader  which if the address was given in one to one communication via ebay and on correspondence such as a shipping note, invoice, packing list, email, letter etc and the seller maintained good communication throughout, it would be highly unlikely to attract any attention.

At the very least a sole trader would have a good excuse not to display an home address and this would be mitigated by the trader supplying contact details address, etc on all one to one correspondence. In these circumstances would any action be taken ?

[jonat_broad]

Simply put, the law says an address for a business must be displayed on any website the business may use in the running of said business (among other things).

eBay deem this to be on your seller profile area.

the whole point is so customers are aware of who they are dealing with and can judge if they are an honest company. That wouldn’t be possible if you don’t have that information until you’ve actually placed an order (this obviously ignores the fact many buyers might be happy to buy from a business that is a private seller or don’t care about this information but that doesn’t matter, because legally the company name must be displayed somewhere)

[papso22]

You are right to an extent but it's not restricted to companies.   The legal requirement to provide contact details (together with other specified information),  to prospective buyers before purchase is the same for all trading entities, including sole proprietors.

The legal impacts of not doing so include having to accept returns (at the seller's expense) for any reason for up to 12 months from the sale.

[dubstaruk]

I agree, this basically gives the business a price advantage over the private seller. Ebay takes a bit of profit from the private sellers who now have to reduce their pricing to sell off whatever it is they need to, as this doesn't effect private businesses, WHO SHOULD PAY MORE BECAUSE ITS BUSINESS!!!!!

*bleep* move by eBay!

Why should buyers pay more, or private seller have to sell for less, to subsidise and appease the private sellers really?

[theelench]

"Simply put, the law says an address for a business must be displayed on any website the business may use in the running of said business (among other things)."

And:

"The whole point is so customers are aware of who they are dealing with and can judge if they are an honest company."

Would this include a business's 'buying account'?

Surely, particularly in second-hand and collectables categories of on-line selling, it's essential that the public should be made aware that they are dealing with a trader when selling their possessions?

An honest business would make their customers aware that they are in fact dealing with a business and not making a c2c private sale?

I know of two traders on ebay (one properly registered, the other not) in the vintage glass categories that interest me that are buying on private accounts without any information that they are businesses.

How 'legal' is that? 

[dch2112011]

Considering that the majority of buyers think that they are buying from 'ebay'  I doubt that many care or even look for who the seller is - (until a problem occurs and ebay point them in the seller's direction.)

The problem is 100% the way ebay do not police their own policy with any real conviction instead adopting the attitude that policing is up to the authorities  who are facilitated by ebay to do so !

This denial of responsibility allows members to decide what type of account they use and what they sell regardless of legal status which produces the unfair playing field. 

However with the changes to private accounts, it should become less desirable for traders to use a private account .

With so many traders using private accounts - perhaps ebay should also make no fault returns mandatory for all sellers - they could easily do this as it is over and above legal requirement !  And why not ?- what objection would decent honest sellers have to it ?

[1956glyn]

Hi

I do not think that....... "However with the changes to private accounts, it should become less desirable for traders to use a private account "....because even with the new changes to private accounts surely it would still be a lot cheaper for them to continue to sell that way??????     I thought business sellers fees are a lot higher? 

To be honest as a private seller i would not be keen on no fault mandatory returns.      I do have 100% confidence in everything i list BUT saying that I would not want someone using my item for quite a while or deciding after a few weeks they could not really afford it.      This idea would put a lot of private buyers off listings especially if they rely on the money from ebay sales to pay bills (which we do not).     Also if someone wants a refund all they have to do is "play the game" and open a NAD case against sellers who do not offer no fault returns.

It is also frustrating at times when people not only think they are buying from Ebay.....but also speaking to them directly on these boards 😞

[papso22]

---

@dubstaruk wrote:

I agree, this basically gives the business a price advantage over the private seller. Ebay takes a bit of profit from the private sellers who now have to reduce their pricing to sell off whatever it is they need to, as this doesn't effect private businesses, WHO SHOULD PAY MORE BECAUSE ITS BUSINESS!!!!!

*bleep* move by eBay!

Why should buyers pay more, or private seller have to sell for less, to subsidise and appease the private sellers really?

---

I find this post extremely confusing. Have you mixed up private sellers and business sellers? 

Properly registered business sellers pay to sell on ebay, private sellers, (including those that are really businesses trading illegally on a private account), pay nothing for basic listings and sales. 

They pay nothing even if they have decided to reduce their prices to allow for the buyer protection fee that is charged to, and paid by, buyers.

Businesses have stock, overheads (fees, wages, and taxes) to cover from their sales income, so they have to price to cover those, how on earth does that give them a 'price advantage'?

[papso22]

Would this include a business's 'buying account'?

I would say that a business that buys stuff for the business using an ebay private account is guilty of misrepresenting themselves as a private individual, which is against the law.

The transactions would not be covered by consumer law because they are not a consumer, and ebay tells sellers they need a business account if buying for a business.  

These are B2B transactions nor B2C, there is no consumer protection in B2B because there is no C.

[theelench]

But these are C2B sales where C should have the protection of knowing that they're dealing with a B not another C.

I know of 2 examples of B's disguised as C's using private 'buying' accounts, because they've bought from me, are in the same niche that I buy in and as they are on my Saved Sellers list I can see my sold item is soon re-listed  on their selling account.

There are probably many more, the practice is common enough that businesses on here have swapped anecdotes about flipping vinyl or desirable collectables having persuaded the (private) seller that they have always wanted it for their own collection.

I think it's common practice among ebay business sellers, facilitated by the anonymity that ebay gives them.  Including some of those who spend so much time pointing out the illegality of businesses selling on private accounts, when they are also getting an unfair advantage over their competitors.   They are both mis-representing themselves to gain by doing so. 

[fatmackerel]

I do agree if you are just destadhing or selling relatives stuff off it us hard to be cheap enough to tempt people. On the flip side when I buy littke bits fir myself I have to pay the buyers fee. It seems that ebay don't quite know what to do yj compete with other selling sites.  Maybe back to car boots 😆 

[kath3735_wxmjn]

is that not what being a business is about - making profits?   The customers of any business have really two choices if they do not like the changes, put up or leave.  You can start as many on line petitions or sit on here protesting all you want but at the end of the day it will still be only when they make a loss that any business will look again at their 'improvements'.

[kath3735_wxmjn]

i find it interesting that it appears from the threads on here that it is many pseudo private sellers who have delisted their items and/or doing the most complaining.   That by the way is just my opinion from being an avid reader of these threads and could obviously be wrong)  I also thought that a lot of them are new names to this site and do not appear to have been active on the forums prior to this....

[23sandlane]

My sales have certainly plummeted since the introduction of BPF. Having said that I've contributed a number of messages to this forum and I know it sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory but it is a fact, coincidence or not, that whenever I've made a bit of a fuss on forums my sales have dropped off for a while - so I'm not sure if  the current sales drop is due to BPF raising the price of my £2.99 postcard sales to £3.86 (a ridiculously large increase for such a small items!) or me having a black mark on my Ebay record. Thoughts people? 

[theelench]

I can't remember which one it was but I'm sure one other site did adopt the "Free to Sell & Buyer Fee" model and not long after reversed their decision in the face of falling sales and seller complaints.

Unfortunately ebay has got the "Divide and Rule" principal down to a fine art, all the recent changes and restrictions are aimed at private sellers.  The only way that businesses will suffer is by a further fall in sales and many will decide (as always) to hang on and hope for better days when / if they return and start spending again.

Ebay won't be worried about business sellers loosing a percentage of their sales and profits, at least not unless the cumulative  effect is great enough to show up on ebays bottom line.  By then it will too late to get many of the private sellers back or turn around the, by then, non-viable businesses.