---

@vinylscot wrote:

 

Should eBay have covered this if the buyer had used the reason "arrived damaged"? The terms of SD say it will be covered if the item is lost or damaged, not if the package is damaged. eBay often requires photographs of damage, and I would imagine that, for £250.00, they would reject the claim of damage.

 

However, the claim should still be valid as the item was lost, even if the packaging wasn't, and I am surprised that eBay has not recognised that, and refunded the seller.

 

---

In an earlier thread I posited eBay needs a "Received an empty package" return option where Simple Delivery is concerned. eBay's policy states:

"There are many benefits to using Simple Delivery, including:

• You'll be protected if the item is lost or damaged from the point the item is scanned into the carrier's delivery network and until it's marked as delivered"

So, once the item is marked as delivered eBay considers it to be delivered regardless what the buyer claims. There's no way of knowing for certain in this case but in another previously reported case it was clear the buyer was telling the truth (received a different item) due to the picture obtained with the delivery scan; i.e. it was a clear case of theft by courier although the item was switched rather than an empty package being delivered.

---

@vinylscot wrote:

 

The real problem now, as I see it, is that the seller has no recourse against the courier. The courier's contract is with eBay, and they will not enter into any discussion with the seller. Would it be worth trying to call first thing in the morning (8:00) and hoping to get connected to someone in Ireland? They are almost always far more knowledgeable.

 

---

You're correct; where a Simple Delivery label is concerned the seller has no contract with the carrier so can't make a claim for compensation against them; I have no idea why eBay's customer services would even have suggested that. The issue I see is this:

1. The OP lost the INAD case
2. The OP contacted eBay's CS and was promised a refund
3. The OP appealed eBay's original decision via the closed case and received a "final decision"

That "final decision" is important; it is eBay's (legal) way of saying exactly that. Somewhere in the small print at the bottom of that message there is likely a mention of being able to take the matter further with the Financial Ombudsman Service. The OP could try contacting eBay's CS pointing out the promise they received of a "manual refund" mentioning their intention of taking the matter up with the FOS. In one of the cases linked earlier I advised the user to specifically ask eBay for a "final decision" which seemingly caused eBay to suddenly change their tune - I suspect this was because such a request would only be made if someone intended to make a complaint to the FOS. However, the OP has already been given a final decision which is something eBay are not supposed to do unless they really mean it.

---

@vinylscot wrote:

 

As an aside, although it has been alluded to, I don't think anyone has explicitly suggested to the seller yet, that if she has the IMEI, she should be able to get the phone blocked, so it won't be of any use to whoever has it now.

---

Reporting the IMEI as stolen will block the device from every UK network so it is worth doing. However, most stolen devices are either stripped for parts or exported rendering a UK-only IMEI block useless. The block is only really useful if the device is sold to an unsuspecting buyer or used by a particularly stupid thief who doesn't realise the IMEI can be geolocated when the device is powered on. The OP's report to Action Fraud/Report Fraud is their evidence they are a victim of fraud; eBay have an obligation under their FCA regulation to protect consumers against becoming victims of fraud.