Totally useless complaint system

[pixel24n]

I am incensed by the fact that a buyer can make out that an item was damaged on return when it clearly wasn't and where I was able to provide ample evidence to eBay when the item was returned to me that was the case and yet the buyer gets the return and my counter complaint about the buyer is totally disregarded.  eBay makes noises that it is greatly concerned about any dishonestey from buyers but that turns out to be completely without any intent and it total hot air.  So the buyer openly gets away with fraud and dishonesty and eBay effectively condones this. With policies like this is it any  wonder that we live in an increasinly dishonest society?

[tressygirl]

Infuriating and upsetting as it is,  and I fully agree and understand that,  the fact is,  eBay cannot actually see the item,  so cannot be sure / prove who is telling the truth,  buyer or seller. 

Therefore, the only way out is to fully refund the buyer if they open a case for item not as described,  and the seller can then either appeal the decision if they feel the item was not damaged,  or claim from the postal service used for damage to an item.  Items do with regularity become damaged in the post.

[dch2112011]

Unfortunately, consumer protection laws dictate everywhere not just ebay - It is down to the opinion of the buyer - who in his case voiced the opinion that the item was damaged.

You know it isn't and quite possibly the buyer used it to avoid the return costs on a remorse return.

Basically you have no recourse - your word against the buyer - for the cost of the return an argument not worth your time and effort.

Ebay because it mixes personal and business accounts where personal can refuse remorse returns and businesses cannot but both legally have to accept returns for damaged or incorrectly described items which are protected by ebay money back guarantee leaves the door open for customers wanting to return items for a refund with the option to use the seller's fault option to return.

It is all down to trust maybe if ebay forced all sellers to accept returns remorse as well as fault then this scenario may not happen so often.  Who knows ?

[pixel24n]

Ample evidence was given to eBay (and a video offered) which clearly showed the claim was fraudulent.  They clearly took no interest in that.

[tressygirl]

Which courier / postal service did you use?

Can you claim from them, that the item was damaged on receipt.

[tommystrezures]

It is annoying to say the least, but as @tressygirl mentions ebay never physically see the item. However some buyers will use the damaged/item not as described case as a method of forcing sellers to accept returns. Even if there is nothing wrong with the item.

What many other private sellers do and its your choice whether you consider this, but if you were to accept returns even for a 14 day period, then it would stop a lot of this. If the buyer doesn't like the item then they pay for the return postage not you, and it stops them opening up false claims such as in your case.

[papso22]

Try to see this from Ebay's perspective.  How does the video prove you sent what was in the video, and the condition of what you sent?

[plpmr]

adding to the advice already given -

If you do press matters further you might have a problem because of the false positive you left the buyer.

The buyer can get it removed and that will damage your account and then they can thrash your feedback profile with negative feedback etc.

[pixel24n]

I would just add that the apparent damage only occured after I countered the claim that an important part of the item was not with it.   That was very clear in the listing information.  Additionally, all my listings have 'Caveat emptor',  'let the buyer beware' clearly stated, which is part of English law.   One person messged to ask if it was significant for the dongle to be with the item and I replied it was. The buyer did not ask the question, as indeed i didn't when I bought it. So, caveat emptor applies just as much to me as to anyone else. They buyer got caught by caveat emptor and then contrived the damage to validate the return and refund.  eBay took no account of any of this. Personally am totally disguested.

[tommystrezures]

Unfortunately ebay doesn't operate to "Caveat Emptor" which generally only applies to property these days. Ebay operate to their own Terms and Conditions which you agreed to when you signed up your account. To put a statement on your listings as you did does not cover you what so ever.

[pixel24n]

There is no evidence of damage in transit. There was no impact damge on the box which was the original Microsoft box and quite substantial.

[pixel24n]

Thanks, Tommy. Useful point to consider.

[*help_no_brakes*]

"Caveat emptor"? 🤣

Have you read the eBay Money Back Guarntee on your litings?

[pixel24n]

Understood but also exactly my point. That eBay considers itself is greater than the law of the country. 

[dch2112011]

It clearly has upset you - if only Caveat Emptor was that simple !

The customer has a right to return a damaged item, whether the reason in the seller's opinion is true or not is fairly irrelevant when selling especially online.

Your only loss is the cost of the return because you have the goods back in good condition available to sell again.

You have an inconvenience of having to wait for the income it will generate until it is sold again.

You could take this the positive out of this and look at how your listing is worded - think mobile device  and see if you can reduce the risk of a buyer overlooking the missing part / item 

You may be able to obtain a courtesy refund for the return postage as mentioned by tommystrezures - someone may be able to explain that process to you.

[pixel24n]

To briefly explainl  It was a keyboard which needed a dedicated dongle.  It was clearly stated the dongle was not in the listing.  It was agreed with aBay that a final arbitration woudl be relevant to the claimed damage on receipt. I said that if there had been damage in transit there wold have been impact damage to the box. On receipt of the item back to me, there was none.   The 'damage' was the Esc button at the top left which was ascew and, in the process, keeping the two parts of the keyboard there separated. The momnent  the Esc button was returned to its correct position the two parts of the keyboard were easily and firmly clipped back together.  The video showed an attempt, albeit unsuccessfully, to replicate creating the fault.   It  obviously took a very deliberate effort to create the fault. So clearly the displaced Esc button,  to infer damage on receipt was contrived.  Remember it was agreed with eBay that this point would be the final arbiter.   Pictures were set and, as mentioned, a video was offered but there was no further interest from eBay and they have arbitarily close the case in favour of the buyer.  I remain disgusted.

[pixel24n]

Thanks. Point noted.

[pixel24n]

Many thanks. Also noted.

[pixel24n]

Thanks everyone for your useful and helpful contributions. I appreciate the points made. Nevertheless baseline it is effectively still a case of eBay openly condoning deceit and dishonesty and they are making their own rules regardless of the laws of the country.  

[geosacha007]

While I am totally with you on the buyer's behaviour on this occasion, caveat emptor is most definitely not the law of the land.