feb 4th the clock is ticking

[reasonable-robert]

a lot has been said on S/C about this but what will e bay really be like after the 4th of feb as quite a few private  sellers intend to walk away from e bay will it no longer be viable to sell on e bay and it just implodes from within with sales plummeting to the point of oblivion.

buyers could turn to e bays biggest rivals like amazon or ali express to buy and as someone pointed out if they wanted a £10 blue ray dvd thats what they want to pay not £11.75 and would shop elsewhere to get it at that price.

or if not the above rivals but cheaper at tesco, sainsburys ,morrisons or asda with the weekly shop.

the BS may dance with delight about this decision but to be honest if the buyers have gone where will your meagre sales come from this may turn out to be e bays biggest blunder and may come back to haunt them and they maybe even back pedal but once you lose those sellers it will be difficult to attract people back to e bay.

so what of the future if e bay want an even bigger slice of the cake after all they do answer to their shareholders and investors what else is around the corner.

we know simple delivery is right behind the buyer protection fee where e bay take total control from the sale to the delivery forcing use of their packlink service making them more money as well as intrest which they claim they dont make on held funds this is before we get on to the potential scammers taking advantage of more holes than a swiss cheese.

B/S dont think you will escape the wrath either because as fees plummet with the private sellers  the will turn to the B/S to recoup lost money as they are ebays cash cow.

who knows what e bay will come up with next both buyer and seller paying a fee just like auctions perhaps.

this is just the beginnning

[ett1954]

"Ebay wish to force people, who run businesses on private accounts, to register as business accounts." - I suspect you may be correct but it is a rather clumsy way of doing it.  However once the data starts rolling in from digital platforms it will not take much of a bright spark at HMRC to wonder why there are such a significant proportion of people apparently trading on eBay illegally. 

This could lead to questions being asked as to why eBay are facilitating illegal activities and questioning about their due diligence in the matter.  All a result of not doubling down on the issue years ago but rather encouraging it.

My sympathies are with the genuine private sellers who now have to suffer the fallout.

[goodibags]

I won't be joining that bank then.

Apparently, you are now asked for photo id to withdraw money from your own pension pot.

Which is weird as you're never asked for photo id to contribute to one.

@lucy_farmer  Or possibly they're not too bothered, as we discussed yesterday?

Either that or they want to phase out private seller accounts completely? If only Ebay could make their minds up.

[1956glyn]

it seems as if everywhere want photo id nowadays.......that why i got fed up and just renewed my passport 🙂

[insidethe93]

That sounds particularly officious or restrictive. BarcLloyds perchance? If so, if you or someone you represent don't have either, ask to see a higher up bank official - a prior appointment is likely to be required.

As you can have documents and photos certified as being true or a photo of you as a true likeness by certain categories of people, I arranged it in the case of a relative. Only last year I arranged it for another relative who lives in Australia: Barclays, Lloyds, insurers and everyone accepted certification signed by an Australian pharmacist (I believe HMRC too but the probate solicitor handled that). The pharmacist's surname was Duck; almost everyone, even a seemingly ultra-solemn bank official, made the "quack" joke.

I saw the categories on a government website years ago and have a note somewhere, and I know solicitors (who'll provide certification) know the list, but I can't find the info right now. Categories include:

doctor, minister of religion, councillor, teacher, dentist

i.e. you don't have to ask only a solicitor to do it; there might or might not be a fee, guess who's likely to charge. It looks like a list of those typically considered to be upstanding in the community.

Mentioned in case someone finds it helpful, worth knowing you don't have to use a solicitor to certify things.

[goodibags]

This is true. Last year I saw a small child refused an ice cream from a van because they didn't have a bank debit card. No cash accepted.

Soon, we won't be able to buy an ice cream without a valid passport.

[goodibags]

"doctor, minister of religion, councillor, teacher, dentist"

It's funny because there was a time in the distant past when you needed a letter of approval from an 'authorised' person just to open a bank account.

Imagine having to plead and beg a bank manager to accept your money?

And yet we appear to have come full circle. 

[theelench]

---

@lucy_farmer wrote:

'Great! 14 days after i sell an item i will finally get my money, said no  business ever.'

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

I think that's part of the point of ebay's plan...... Business sellers *don't* have to deal with the new rules; for them life goes on as normal.

Ebay wish to force people, who run businesses on private accounts, to register as business accounts.

---

If that's ebay's plan it doesn't appear to be working too well.  apart from the seller you quote here it took me all of two minutes to find another example (on the BSB) of a business seller reporting a "private" seller continuing as if nothing had changed.

IF it was ebay's plan, it's akin to Tesco strip searching all shoppers as they leave because some customers might have been shop-lifting.

It's typical of ebay, hitting the innocent with a one-size-fits-all solution that's badly thought out in a rushed attempt to solve a problem that ebay created in the first-place.

Perhaps ebay had another plan?

Making it Free to Sell to further encourage "private" sellers, making genuine private sellers pay part of the bill because businesses pretending to be "private" sellers are far more likely to pay the Sponsorship Fees that ebay relies on, but private sellers won't

Let's take that a little further to include the new HMRC Reporting rules.

This year ebay will be starting to collect sales info. on established sellers, knowing that most "private" sellers, being businesses, will be HMRC compliant and already paying their taxes.

So hasn't ebay done itself a big favour?

"Private" sellers won't be jumping ship because of HMRC involvement.

They'll continue paying ebay Sponsorship Fees.

Especially now they don't have to pay FVFs.

AND

ebay gets rid of lots of those irritating private sellers who won't jump when they're told to post their sales quicker.  

Won't Sponsor their ads.

Will have to be reported to HMRC for selling 31 stamps or other low value collectables.

Thereby reducing ebay's outlay for complying with legislation, which it's already charging sellers the Operating Fee for.

Ker-ching for ebay again.

IMO ANY private seller who stays here needs their head examined.  All ebay wants you for is to prop-up, subsidise and buy from businesses, whether correctly registered or not.

[jil_3862]

"as a private seller i know what will negatively impact my business"

 I think what Papso22 was referring to was the oxymoron contained within that sentence!

 Are you a private seller simply disposing of surplus items from your home, or a business? You literally can't be both!

[goodibags]

"Will have to be reported to HMRC for selling 31 stamps or other low value collectables"

At least the excessive new Buyer Fees will have ensured that this particular exercise in HMRC timewasting will NOT be repeated next year.  😉

[1956glyn]

Santander.......Nothing is done in branch all online or over the phone.  Gone are the days where one walks into a branch.....sort your business out and leave.

I need a solicitor to certify some legal documentation and i MUST even have a photo driving licence or passport for that too.   They charge £20 to £30 a time to do that too.

its all to do with the money laundering rules.   To be honest they are bordering on being paranoid.

[lucy_farmer]

'IF it was ebay's plan, it's akin to Tesco strip searching all shoppers as they leave because some customers might have been shop-lifting.

It's typical of ebay, hitting the innocent with a one-size-fits-all solution that's badly thought out in a rushed attempt to solve a problem that ebay created in the first-place.'

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

Good way of putting it!

Ebay have indeed created much of this problem by offering private sellers 1000's of listings, multi-buy options, shop options, out-of-stock options.......no wonder lots of small businesses thought it was perfectly acceptable to trade on a private account.

So yes, they've made a bit of a rod for their own back there.

And I reckon you're right, in that 'private' sellers are way more likely to use promotions/sponsoring etc than genuine private sellers.

Also think you're right in most  'private' sellers being on the ball with taxes; HMRC is a lot more scary than ebay!

But, there is something to do with the way the digital world is developing that *might* be worrying ebay.

Up until now there has been very little co-operation, passing of info etc between official and business computer systems, but that has changed recently with the new Online Money laundering rules over the whole OECD.

This has resulted in all online businesses being obliged to give their customers' financial details to the authority in their country that deals with income ; in our case the HMRC.

So these computer systems are already starting to speak to each other.

I think it's a given that authorities like Consumer Law  etc , will eventually get in on the act and be able to have a look at what everybody is up to as well!

Ebay know that Consumer law in the UK requires anybody selling online as a business,  to adhere to their legal requirements.

(selling as a business means anybody buying , making, growing to sell on)

If it becomes apparent that ebay are allowing sellers to 'business sell' against UK law, it's going to look terrible for ebay's legal situation.

They'll look like a digital law-breaker.

[insidethe93]

I dealt with Santander last year. I dealt with several main and minor banks, and into this year. Not just a case of certain relatives not having a passport or driving licence but "nope, I'm not sending originals or copies by physical post or digitally; don't want the banks to have that info". (Quite telling, that refusal - two relatives, like me, have worked/work for banks.) I rang S. and the other banks, no problems. Some customer advisors are more helpful than others, depends who answers. If someone unhelpful answers, maybe ring later or ask to speak to their supervisor/someone higher up (you might be put through to a different department).

Yes there are tight regulations aimed at preventing money-laundering but (usually) organisations want your business, or have to do business with you if it's attorney/probate or you have accounts with them.

UK law doesn't specify banks must accept only passports or photo driving licences as forms of ID. Banks have some flexibility in determining acceptable forms of identification, but they are required to follow regulations for verifying customer identity and there's a range of legally acceptable docs,  including but not limited to: passport, photo driving licence (full or provisional), biometric residence permit, current year's council tax statement, recent evidence of benefits entitlement, proof of age cards with a PASS logo (e.g. CitizenCard). I've also used various domestic bills, a (redacted) property lease, and (redacted) contracts of various kinds, and of course the armoury provided by having docs and photo certified.

If a customer cannot provide standard proof of identity, banks are expected to have procedures to assist them i.e. they shouldn't just turn you away, at least not straight away. Said procedures include accepting a combination of other docs or using alternative methods to verify identity. Yes banks must comply with anti-money laundering regulations and "Know Your Customer" (KYC) requirements, but they have more discretion than a jobsworth bank official might admit. If a customer can't provide satisfactory identification, a bank may refuse to open an account or deal with them, but that wouldn't be due to any law mandating only specific types of ID because such a law doesn't exist - don't let them make you think otherwise.

If I haven't bored you too much, it can be worth knowing that banks, or jobsworths at banks, might try it on that you must lend or show them the original doc. You don't need to! As an attorney I didn't send any original docs nor leave any original docs with them except to photocopy, which happened just once as one bank, and one only (a Scottish bank), required to see the original, took it and photocopied it (I pointed out that because they were using grey thin recycled paper some print wasn't showing so they took the photocopy of a certified copy I'd brought for them). As an attorney I sent out over 100 certified copies of the Lasting Power of Attorney alone, and I sent out a redacted version; actually I got a few copies certified by a solicitor (who charged £50 each plus VAT) in case, then sent out photocopies of that, saying they were photocopies of a certified copy and if anyone wanted to buy a proper certified copy they could do so at their own expense - no one ever did; the redacted version was always accepted and first time. Only with a few (but not all) banks and an insurer did I give an unredacted version but still a copy. Beware sending docs that contain info that'd be a gift to ID-thieves.

I know this has gone a bit off-topic, but I hope if helps even one person, as it's handy to know that you do NOT have to accept what a bank or similar organisation tells you re ID - don't let them bully you, especially not into self-compromising security on your data.

[insidethe93]

P.S. types of ID are considered classed as "primary" e.g. passport/driving licence, and "secondary" e.g. council tax bill. Usually you "need" one primary and one secondary but, as I said, banks have much more discretion than they might admit to. The primary and secondary categories are what organisations tend to use as a standard, but it all gives way to what the law requires not what company policy wants.

[insidethe93]

goodibags wrote: ...there was a time in the distant past when you needed a letter of approval from an 'authorised' person just to open a bank account...

In the 19th century and ceased in 1975 due to the Sex Discrimination Act, a married woman needed a form signed by her husband authorising the bank to open an account for her. Women with bank jobs had to resign when they married - known as 'the marriage bar' - it started to be stopped in 1950. My mother-in-law was required to resign from Barclays due to 'the marriage bar'.

[lucy_farmer]

Wow... my late sister-in-law had to get her father to sign her mortage as well in about 1984.

Not becuase she didn't earn enough ; but because she was a single woman.......

[insidethe93]

I've had a few messages sent to me direct ('ta for the info' and one connected) - I didn't know people could do that. So I'm glad I'm helping and I appreciate being told. But don't hesitate to do a bit of research, easier to do now we've got the internet, re banks or docs or conveyancing or insurance or wherever you find people try to force-fit you to their agenda against your interest, or to lord it over you with their smug "I know more than you do" knowledge/jargon. I've found you're instantly better off and more likely to be given your rightful proper due once someone sees you know what you're talking about, or if you have to push to get proper service at least you'll know what to do.

[1956glyn]

I worked in Solicitors offices for about 20 years and when it comes to conveyancing and mortgages especially......nothing is hardly now as it was then.    5 steps to even get a mortgage !!!!! involving hours on the phone and submitting documents online.      I was told that our local branch does not even have mortgage advisors there.  My son has friends who have just given up due to all the "red tape".

AND Solicitors fees vary by up to £900 to do exactly the same job.   (the conveyancing part)