Ebay's new buyer protection scam

[wayne15071965]

So I have been a seller on and off her since June 2001, Over the years I have sent items recorded delivery that either never turn up , or arrive with no notification of delivery.  Now someone wants to charge a buyer a fee for safe delivery, when they would have been charged that in the P&P cost.  Frankly it sounds more like a scam than customer service and Ebay are also trying to force us to use their shipping option, So much for free enterprise, sound like trying to get the monopoly on delivery as well.  As for hanging on the sellers cash til 2 days after delivery, really so post office goes on strike and you don't get paid, Think I may start looking to leave. So much for eBay's loyalty to us .

[papso22]

---

@goodibags wrote:

Yes, it would certainly be a lot easier IF Ebay actually did its own explaining which would likely go some way to alleviating both sellers and buyers fears and confusion about why certain changes are being imposed on them. If that was not too much to ask for.

Clearly, wrt buyer fees, Ebay has decided to impose a charge for a service previously providing for free, much like it rolled out charging seller fees on postage costs back in the day. Leaving aside the issue around collections, would you agree that the fees themselves are unnecessary given the money back guarantee?

And that Ebay has taken an unnecessarily complicated route, when seller fees are so much easier to understand and did not completely mess up the buyer experience?

---

I have a great deal of trouble understanding why ebay has gone about this the way they have.

[originsreborn]

...BRAVO!! 😂

[vinylscot]

Would everyone have felt a little better about this if eBay had come out and stated "due to economic conditions, and its increasing use, it has become impossible to continue to offer the eBay Money Back Guarantee free of charge across the board. To cover this cost, going forward, all private sellers' listings will be subject to a buyers' fee of 75p plus 4% of the sale price of their listings. Business sellers will continue to have the cost of the MBG built in to their fees"

That is pretty much what they've done, so would that have made it any more acceptable?

[lucy_farmer]

Errrr.... yes. I think so.

It wouldn't be welcomed but I don't think it would have had quite the same response...

Everybody knows things are tough right now, and honesty is always preferable to most people.

It the sheer patronising bullsh** that tries to sell it all as 'improvements' that winds everyone up...😡

[andha-21]

No, it isn't what they have done. That's why the Money Back Guarantee is still advertised on every listing I've checked.

The BPF isn't a replacement, it's an as well as.

& nobody here seems to be totally against them earning money. I spent years paying there fees with no complaint, I'd wager many others are the same.

The anger mostly seems to be with the way they have done it. If they wanted more money all they had to do was reintroduce seller fees and forego all this unnecessary bull*bleep*.

[vinylscot]

But it's all semantics. Why didn't they just remove the MBG? It would have made it all so much easier to understand.

What's the point of the MBG now; as you've said in the past, you seem to be covered twice. It should have been presented much better than it was.

[papso22]

I think they just needed to say that the BPF now covers access to the MBG when you buy from a private seller, and when you buy from a business seller you get it for free.  It's the trying to sell it as an extra that is causing the problems.  It might simply be another example of ebay's poor communication though. 

[ett1954]

"BPF now covers access to the MBG when you buy from a private seller, and when you buy from a business seller you get it for free. " - correct sentiment but wrong wording.  It should be: BPF now covers access to the MBG when you buy from a private seller, and when you buy from a business seller it remains covered by the Consumer Rights Act as it was previously.

As far as I can see eBay's MBG never provided anything that wasn't already covered by legislation when buying from a business seller other than being a conduit for the actual process.

[podlingsmum2007]

If the buyer fee was to access the money back guarantee then why does it get refunded in full as part of that money back guarantee? If it was a fee to access consumer rights would it  be non refundable?

Sorry, that was a general reply, not to a specific member.

[theelench]

Particularly as it's dressed up as being 'extra' protection when buying from private sellers.  Quite an insult to the huge numbers of private sellers who have been selling on spotless accounts for years or even decades.

Then to rub salt in the wound of this near slanderous warning by adding weird amounts to every private seller listing which ebay obviously intends that the seller should absorb to turn their prices back into 'round numbers' that they should know buyers prefer.

Then just to twist the knife a little more telling them that they'll have to wait even longer for their money.

And all this because ebay has allowed business sellers to abuse ebay's private accounts.  It is taking the p*ss even for ebay. 

[ett1954]

"And all this because ebay has allowed business sellers to abuse ebay's private accounts." - They didn't allow it; they encouraged it and now the time is coming where it has the potential to come back and hurt eBay from both a PR and financial standpoint and they don't know how to deal with it.  As a result many of the recent decisions seem to be the result of panic and desperation.

It will be interesting when the final quarter financial results for 2024 are announced tomorrow whether eBay's UK performance is identified or whether it is hidden amongst the global figures.  Either way the delayed announcement suggests results will be spun as they usually are to hide the true state of the business with profit from any income, or sale of previous acquisitions,  used once again in share buybacks to keep the investors sweet and the board subsequently enriched.  Where are the activist investors when you need one?

[theelench]

"they encouraged it"

I just said exactly the same on the "Cap private sellers at 100 live listings..." thread!

I agree about the panic and desperation.

The figures we normally see are for ebay.inc and world wide, but someone said on here quite recently that the .uk figures can be found although probably with more difficulty and only if you know where to look.  I'm hoping that they will come back with up-dates.

Not so sure about activist investors, they're better known for going for "a quick buck" rather than longer term thinking.  The ebay / paypal split  IMO a prime example.

IMO it really needs the current major shareholders to start looking beyond the buy-backs and perhaps asking why they're needed? 

[papso22]

---

@podlingsmum2007 wrote:

If the buyer fee was to access the money back guarantee then why does it get refunded in full as part of that money back guarantee? If it was a fee to access consumer rights would it  be non refundable?

Sorry, that was a general reply, not to a specific member.

---

It is odd that you pay it to get protection and then when you make a claim through the money back guarantee you get it refunded.  So did you actually pay at all?

[leighbayuk]

And if a buyer makes a claim where does the money come? From the sellers money held in escrow earning interest for eBay. So the protection fee is for making the transfer?

[andha-21]

Not sure exactly what you mean by claim but there has been at least 1 posted example here where eBay took the refund straight from a sellers funds, not from the escrow. 

So the seller sent the item and refunded it before getting paid ...

[podlingsmum2007]

I hadn't noticed it before  but buyer protection is mentioned on business sellers listings. When going to checkout, the order page states includes buyer protection. Click the link and the pop up states that buyer protection is included at no extra cost. It seems that this new feature is here to stay.

[ett1954]

"buyer protection is mentioned on business sellers listings" - It also gives a link which takes buyers to a page which includes, amongst others, the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the The Consumer Rights Act 2015 detailing the protection and rights a buyer has when buying from a business seller.  The MBG gives nothing which isn't covered by those pieces of Consumer Legislation when buying from a business seller - it is just a means to project an image that eBay are providing something special; particularly to the uninitiated.

It's not unique to eBay; many companies use this method of marketing which appears to give you something you already have ........ but probably didn't know it.

[papso22]

To be fair though the MBG gives you a much easier way to use most consumer rights than if you had to go direct to the seller.  

We can see the sort of problems buyers have enforcing rights that last longer than the 30 day MBG,  so imagine if the MBG wasn't there!

[leighbayuk]

---

@andha-21 wrote:

Not sure exactly what you mean by claim but there has been at least 1 posted example here where eBay took the refund straight from a sellers funds, not from the escrow. 

So the seller sent the item and refunded it before getting paid ...

---

So you are saying the buyer paid, the money was held in escrow, but the refund came from the sellers funds. What then happens to the money paid by the buyer held in escrow?

[papso22]

---

@leighbayuk wrote:

---

@andha-21 wrote:

Not sure exactly what you mean by claim but there has been at least 1 posted example here where eBay took the refund straight from a sellers funds, not from the escrow. 

So the seller sent the item and refunded it before getting paid ...

---

So you are saying the buyer paid, the money was held in escrow, but the refund came from the sellers funds. What then happens to the money paid by the buyer held in escrow?

---

It gets released to the seller.