Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

part three of the ebay propaganda machine.
In the first place none of these examples are fair or without real SLANT.
The side of the seller offering an impossible to find Superman collection that is probably valued more than what it was priced is not given.

The other side of the "varied" shipping time is not con sided i n that the seer likely mean t faster time is possible OR that delivery times are really out of the hands of the seller!

the cry that the seller can be responsible for lost items is bogus as well.
I have had six.. SIX incidents this past year when I have tracked the package TO THE DOOR, and the last entry in the process found on the usps tracking info of the Delivery CONFIRMATION was "Information not available" which, when I called the post offices who deliver the box, meant "Currier did NOT SCAN in Delivery in order to CONFIRM delivery"
\ in that case, it the buyer enact a charge back the seller is SCREWED because the USPS did not do it';s job and the box is counted LOST.
Can it be helped by the seller who purchased DC and handed it over.
It is a mess that C AN be straightened out, but you better have your own paper trail and even then yo are at the mercy of the say so of the carrier.
or buyer.
some sellers should accept return, but will only do so if they can actually get their distributor to make good on broken or defected items.
I make what I sell.
I do NOT accept returns.
BUT, I have had two events where in the shipper all but destroyed what I shipped.
I had to sent before and after pictures, pictures of the box that looked like anvils had been pitched at it and a statement from my buyer affirming the quality of care taken to protect the item against any reasonable, and expected rough handling.
That anything would survive the hit that box too without breaking would be remarkable... or clothes Smile.
In both cases I demanded that the delivery service pay for return shipping refund the shipping for the original desastered delivery attempt.
As well as making restitution to my buyer.
One asked me to make repairs and rebuild what would restore the item.
The other declined a replacement and simply accepted his refund without sending me the item for repair or replacement.
But if thee is any dissatisfaction (and there never is) the I would try to make it right, or else , as in one case(Only case) info the buyer that the details of the auction were not hidden and that I even explained in answer to his question how the item was made. To saddle the SELLER with the blame is again one sided.
that is the consistent factor in this series of articles that qualifies this as propaganda.

Buyers need to be reminded and called to the same integrity and honesty in transactions.

Sellers are due more consideration and protection.
And ebay needs to quit sending THESE guys to tel,l us to sell our hard work and highly valued items for a son at a yard sale.

We are not just making space in the garage and willing to take pennies as long as the clutter becomes some one else's problem.

We are working here.
And we have bills to pay, many of us. and for many on ebay this is more than supplement
This IS the job.
No one badgers McD's to sell burgers for pennies when either are thirty employees and management to pay, property and sales and FICA taxes to pay, utilities and Insurance to cover, inspections to be ready for, and stock and equipment to maintain to specific federal standards.

neither should the ebay seller be so crassly taken for granted.

Most of the articles coming out of Auctiva from ebay are just sickening.

Let's see some HELPFUL, PRO-SELLER PROTECTION and Seller's best interest articles for a change.
I must agree with the previous poster – this article is complete nonsense. Let’s just take one example:

"We cannot [sic] be held responsible for orders lost in the mail."
Oh yes you can! As the seller, you promise to ship an item to the buyer. If it gets lost in the mail, then the buyer has fulfilled her part of the bargain, and you have not.

Firstly, what’s with the “[sic]”? “Cannot” is a perfectly correct word in the English language – the expression does NOT have to be separated into “can not”. In fact, my spell checker wants to correct “can not” into “cannot”.

More importantly though, yes, the writer is correct in saying that the seller promises to ship the article, but NOT that the seller promises to deliver it. The seller has indeed fulfilled his/her part of the contract by shipping the article in an appropriate manner. The rest is up to the delivery agent (post office or courier) who enters into a separate contract to deliver the goods for which the company was paid to do so.

eBay (and apparently now Auctiva) seem to make sellers responsible for everything, and buyers responsible for nothing. These days,

* even if a buyer can’t read the simplest of descriptions, it becomes the seller’s fault (we sold a small 1/87 scale model of a shipping container, in an appropriate scale model railway category, stating both scale anf gauge several times, even explaining the size by using an example, showing pictures of it, listing its exact dimensions in cm, and got negative feedback because the buyer expected to receive the real thing - an actual 6m long shipping container for a total price, including shipping, of less than $20).

* If the seller does everything right but the shipping company fails to deliver, it is the seller’s fault (even if the seller has absolutely no control over the delivery process).

* When things get delayed because some country's Customs Department wants to make a random inspection and takes its time about it, it becomes the seller's fault (we were given negative feedback by a Canadian buyer because the customs department randomly checked the article, thus delaying delivery; online tracking showed that we had shipped the article within an hour of receiving payment, that the article arrived in Canada in less than 3 days, and that it was currently being held by Customs for inspection, yet the buyer claimed that we had failed to ship the article in a safe manner; according to eBay, we now must state explicitly that "we cannot be held responsible for the actions of any government agency", as if that weren't patently obvious to begin with).

* Even if the shipping company also does everything right but returns the article because the buyer was never at home for delivery and failed to make alternative arrangements (or pick up the package), it becomes the seller’s fault (with the buyer demanding that the seller pay for a second international shipping of the same article).

This nonsense really has to stop if eBay wants to survive. You can pander to buyers only so much – in the end, if eBay scares away the sellers, there won’t be any buyers left either.

Add Reply

Copyright © 1999-2018 All rights reserved.
Link copied to your clipboard.