@berylthebear wrote:
Hi Dave - I know the process is beyond eBay's control, I've been told that repeatedly by customer service advisors.
What I don't understand is why eBay would set up a policy which allows a third party arbitrarily take ownership of an item that a user has legitimately won, without explanation, or any mechanism by which the problem can be redressed.
I think it's just a rotten way to treat users, especially given the obfuscation of the customer services advisors. If someone had to said to me at the outset that the item now belonged to a third party, or given me contact details for the third party, or in any way told me the truth, then I'd be disappointed, certainly, but I wouldn't be as angry as I am with eBay. I don't like being given the runaround from an eBay customer services representative! I don't blame them, actually, I think it's down to the corporate culture of the organisation. Basically, I think allowing any item to be subject to a 'hostile takeover bid' by Pitney Bowes is a really, really lousy set up from a user's point of view. And although eBay can claim plausible deniability once the 'retricted' label has been applied, eBay is completely repsonisible for creating the situation in which a user can be this shoddily treated. Allowing for errors to be rectified - such as the mistake in the packaging of my item - is a matter of basic human courtesy. It amazes me that it should not also be a factor in eBay's International Shipping scheme.
If the issue is with the packing for example, its usually the case that the item is too big to be sent through the global shipping programme. This is something that the seller would need to be aware of before sending the item. The guys in shipping can only take action as per the policy in these cases.
The process is clearly laid for both buyer and seller but it may be a case the seller was unaware of the size restriction.
Thanks,
Dave
