I'll repost my response to your reply 🙂
That is fairly clear, if muddled, but it does not address in any way the fact, as stated in the quote I pasted ( I did read the entire chat and all the posts) that there is no refund to the buyer in a SNAD claim (not the fault of the shipper) of the international shipping and taxes paid, which could well be as much or more than the basic cost of the item, the amount that I understand would be refunded.
The buyer who buys a $200 camera,say, and pays $50 shipping and $50 Import charges (I am using UK import VAT levels here to estimate this) will have paid $300. If they then discover that the item is faulty, they open a SNAD claim and under normal terms as outlined above, return the item to the seller at a cost to them of, say, $30, and they will be refunded $200 by the seller..
The cost of this experience to the buyer, through no fault of their own, (unless choosing a seller with a faulty item was a buyer fault) amounts to $130, and they have no camera.
I would be delighted to have it as a statement of policy that the ebay rep 'mis-spoke', as they say. and that this would not be the case, but as it stands I fear it would be. and my hypothetically 'protected' buyer will lose $130 from the $330 they spent: a figure they might not consider amounts to 'shopping safely on ebay'.
These situations should be rare, but just a few customers going totally postal about the money thay have lost, with ebay's connivance, it might be said, will not be good adverts for ebay.
In terms of effective advertising spend, I'd say one customer's negative word of mouth would need several hundred or even thousand dollars media advertising to balance.
The risk of this sort of occasional claim can be calculated, and indeed if you read the terms and conditions it seems that the import charge make up already includes a contingency amount to cover errors and ommissions.
Adding maybe another dollar to cover a complete refund to all buyers whatever the problem (within the buyer protection guidelines) would be a far better idea than stiffing the buyer with a 30% or more dead loss.
Some flaws in this program that should never have made it to the live testing have now been ironed out, but others remain and there seems to be a lack of will or ability to tackle problems a competent manager would never have allowed to arise in the first place.
You replied
It seemed very odd to me that a buyer would be out any $ in a case like the one you describe above (or below, as I type this). So I went back and took a look at the Buyer Terms & Conditions page, and found #4a:
"eBay Buyer Protection. Your purchases of GSP Items on eBay.com are covered by eBay.com’s eBay Buyer Protection policy if your purchases otherwise meet the policy’s eligibility requirements and conditions and do not fall within an exclusion or coverage limitation. eBay.com’s eBay Buyer Protection policy may be different from the eBay Buyer Protection policy (if any) on your own eBay site of registration. If you are eligible for eBay Buyer Protection and eBay finds in your favor in a case stemming from your purchase of a GSP Item under the Program, the applicable coverage amount will include the Program Fees that you paid for the GSP Item."
So the way I read this is that if the item is SNAD, and not the fault of the shipper, the buyer has to ship it back to the seller. If the seller is found to be at fault, the buyer will be refunded an "amount will include the Program Fees that you paid for the GSP Item."
Not trying to argue, or split hairs. And again, you know these policies better than I do. But to me it sounds like the buyer is protected and reimbursed (eventually ....) in SNAD cases. It's simply a matter of whether the reimbursement comes from eBay/Pitney or the seller.
and I replied
But to me it sounds like the buyer is protected and reimbursed (eventually ....) in SNAD cases. It's simply a matter of whether the reimbursement comes from eBay/Pitney or the seller.
A fair response, the policy does indeed read that way. But then, in my hypothetical case, is the seller going to be debited for an extra $100 to cover the amount that it was clearly stated is not refundable from ebay/PB?
. Is the seller warned that by using the GSP they are making themselves liable for ALL GSP fees including the ones kept by ebay/PB that they never see in their accounts. I feel that if this is the case, it should appear quite prominently in the terms and conditions. Sellers may not fancy laying themselves open to liabilities unknown to them (sellers do not see GSP costs or the total the buyer is charged) with every listing.
We seem to have a clear contradiction here. I am not in a position to resolve it, but I would assume you have some sort of ebay chain of command that you can climb up till you reach someone with a definitive answer. Although they may shoot the messenger. 😞
It is quite possible that it is a situation no one has given any thought to. In view of the liabilities for buyer or seller that I have outlined it is about time they did.
Which is how it stands at present.
This is all a bit lengthy but I think the points raised are important and should be considered by buyers and sellers.
c!~~_7.JPG "kalvin@ebay.com"){kind=avatar}
w~~_7.JPG "pjcdn2005"){kind=avatar}
