Hi all,
I’m hoping someone from the eBay technical / seller performance team can help clarify and hopefully resolve what looks like a systemic issue with how tracking data is being interpreted for Late Shipment defects on my account.
Main Issue: Invalid or incomplete tracking data causing Late Shipment defects
I’ve now had three separate transactions where Royal Mail 2nd Class Large Letter shipments have resulted in Late Shipment defects, even though the items were posted on time.
In each case, the tracking data shows:
- No acceptance scan at the point of posting
- Only a single scan event at the point of delivery
- “First scan date” and “Delivery scan date” are identical (Date and Time)
Despite this, the system appears to be using the delivery scan as the first and only tracking event, then concluding that I missed the dispatch deadline by several days and delivered late – even though there is no scan evidence to support when the parcel actually entered the network.
This is particularly problematic for services like Royal Mail 2nd Class Large Letter, where it’s common for there to be no acceptance scan at all until delivery. As a seller, I have no control over whether or when Royal Mail scans the item.
Inconsistent handling of appeals and evidence
What makes this more frustrating is the inconsistency in how these cases have been handled when I’ve appealed:
- In one case, I provided physical proof of posting from a ParcelShop location showing that the parcel was dropped off within my stated handling time.
- My appeal was initially rejected with the explanation that the evidence was not sufficient and they would need to use the tracking information provided by the carrier, and I was advised that nothing could be done.
- After I raised a formal complaint, the defect was later closed/removed with no clear explanation or confirmation as to why.
I now have a third case with exactly the same pattern (no acceptance scan, only a delivery scan, first scan = delivery scan), and my appeal has again been rejected – even though two earlier, almost identical cases have ultimately been closed.
From my perspective as a seller, this feels both:
- Technically flawed – relying on incomplete tracking data (a single delivery scan) to infer dispatch behaviour.
- Procedurally inconsistent – similar cases resulting in different outcomes, even when stronger evidence (like proof of posting) was provided.
What I’m asking for
I’d really appreciate if someone from the technical / seller performance side could look into this and help with:
- Technical review of the tracking logic for cases where:
- There is no separate acceptance scan, and
- The first scan date equals the delivery scan date, especially for Royal Mail 2nd Class Letter / Large Letter services.
In these situations, it doesn’t seem reliable to assume the seller dispatched late purely because the first (and only) scan occurred after the estimated delivery window.
- Clear guidance on alternative evidence – e.g. when physical proof of posting (ParcelShop / Post Office receipt) should be accepted where carrier scans are missing or incomplete.
- Consistent handling of Late Shipment defects in cases with this exact pattern, so similar situations don’t produce different outcomes depending on which agent handles the appeal.
- Reconsideration of the remaining open defect (details below), in line with the two earlier cases which have now been closed.
I take my dispatch commitments seriously and send items within my stated handling time. It’s very discouraging to see my performance metrics impacted by issues that appear to stem from how tracking data is interpreted, rather than from my own behaviour as a seller.
Details for the three affected cases
As you can see, all three cases share the same technical pattern in the tracking data (only a delivery scan; first scan date = delivery scan date), yet two defects have now been closed while the third remains active after appeal.
Any insight or escalation on this would be hugely appreciated, both to correct the current defect and to prevent similar issues for myself and other sellers using Royal Mail services where acceptance scans are unreliable or absent.
Many thanks,
John
VaultifyUK
