“Restricted material” seized by eBay and GSP Pitney Bowes and then resold by eBay different sellers

[followsunmoontruth]

I have been buying antique and vintage Mah Jong sets on eBay to donate to a museum. A few months ago I had 3 different sets "seized" supposedly because of restricted materials despite having purchased other bovine or cow bone and bamboo sets that I have shipped  from UK through to Canada and going though customs with no issue. Recently two sets were posted on eBay UK by two different sellers, with "coincidentally" the same last name, and the same city location, as the Pitney Bowes GSP shipping partner hub. These two sets were relisted using same description as original sellers and clearly are the same sets, as I have photos of the original listings. The exact same paint marks can be seen on the original and relisted item (on lid on tin box on one set,) and the same tiles and set pieces and pencil marks on the paper wrapping are clearly visible on the other set. Also the same identical tiles are clearly shown on both listings that match the original. These sets are more rare and unusual because of the carved subject (Monkey King on one flower set and birds on flower tiles on the other) which is why I was buying them for the museum. These are not valuable in and of themselves, except for the unusual tiles. Clearly there is something terrible wrong when  so called "confiscated" goods can be resold, when there clearly is NO RESTRICTED MATERIAL. I've read that wood cannot be shipped from UK to other places, and that is potentially why the sets were "seized". This is ridiculous and not true, as other sets with wooden cases have clearly been shipped through both countries Customs offices to me. Since these sets were clearly made of cow bone or bovine bone and NOT IVORY, as shown in the relisted items, how can eBay and PItney Bowes justify their arbitrary decision? What restricted material? No evidence or proof was offered. No expert wildlife person deemed the goods restricted. No antique dealer who specializes in ivory said these are ivory. It is unconscionable business practice to "seize" goods based on an unfounded and fraudulent pretext (purportedly restricted material) and then allow someone connected to the system (Pitney Bowes) to resell these basically illegally seized goods! I understand that many other users, both buyers and sellers, have complained about these inappropriate and high handed actions, which frankly constitute an abuse of power. Please join in and register your complaint against these unfair and misguided practices. I am also taking this issue directly to the CEO of eBay and the head of Pitney Bowes GSP and going public with the media to expose this reprehensible behaviour on the part of a corporate organization. 

[lotzofuniquegoodies]

---

@followsunmoontruth wrote:

I have been buying antique and vintage Mah Jong sets on eBay to donate to a museum. A few months ago I had 3 different sets "seized" supposedly because of restricted materials despite having purchased other bovine or cow bone and bamboo sets that I have shipped  from UK through to Canada and going though customs with no issue. Recently two sets were posted on eBay UK by two different sellers, with "coincidentally" the same last name, and the same city location, as the Pitney Bowes GSP shipping partner hub. These two sets were relisted using same description as original sellers and clearly are the same sets, as I have photos of the original listings. The exact same paint marks can be seen on the original and relisted item (on lid on tin box on one set,) and the same tiles and set pieces and pencil marks on the paper wrapping are clearly visible on the other set. Also the same identical tiles are clearly shown on both listings that match the original. These sets are more rare and unusual because of the carved subject (Monkey King on one flower set and birds on flower tiles on the other) which is why I was buying them for the museum. These are not valuable in and of themselves, except for the unusual tiles. Clearly there is something terrible wrong when  so called "confiscated" goods can be resold, when there clearly is NO RESTRICTED MATERIAL. I've read that wood cannot be shipped from UK to other places, and that is potentially why the sets were "seized". This is ridiculous and not true, as other sets with wooden cases have clearly been shipped through both countries Customs offices to me. Since these sets were clearly made of cow bone or bovine bone and NOT IVORY, as shown in the relisted items, how can eBay and PItney Bowes justify their arbitrary decision? What restricted material? No evidence or proof was offered. No expert wildlife person deemed the goods restricted. No antique dealer who specializes in ivory said these are ivory. It is unconscionable business practice to "seize" goods based on an unfounded and fraudulent pretext (purportedly restricted material) and then allow someone connected to the system (Pitney Bowes) to resell these basically illegally seized goods! I understand that many other users, both buyers and sellers, have complained about these inappropriate and high handed actions, which frankly constitute an abuse of power. Please join in and register your complaint against these unfair and misguided practices. I am also taking this issue directly to the CEO of eBay and the head of Pitney Bowes GSP and going public with the media to expose this reprehensible behaviour on the part of a corporate organization. 

---

@followsunmoontruth 

devon@ebay 

Can you address this issue please. Or pass on to the correct department. These types of situations have been reported on both boards as happening frequently with the rollout of eIS. (Especially with antique items or items being purchased for parts where there was no issue making similar type purchases prior to eIS.)  Most frustrating for any buyer trying to make a purchase in good faith. This does not help eBay buyer confidence. 

-Lotz

[reallynicestamps]

It has been reported that shipments seized by the GSP/Pitney Bowes were sold on to liquidators.

These sets were being shipped from the UK?

Does the UK have a law about ivory that allows it to be sold within the country but forbids export?

Apparently yes.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/dealing-in-items-containing-ivory-or-made-of-ivory

If the ivory /bone sets were sold to a liquidator, it should be no surprise that the same person bought both sets. A pretty niche product.

However, the eBay seller should not have been able to list them on eBay at all if eBay believes they are ivory.

Also.

When the GSP seizes shipments, they reimburse the buyer if the buyer opens an Item Not Received dispute. Did you?

From a quick read of the link, your museum could safely buy the sets directly but you can't buy them for donation.

[followsunmoontruth]

Hello,

These sets were both bovine bone and bamboo NOT IVORY, as I do not buy ivory goods.

The issue is clearly, the sets taken wrongfully, as I was told by eBay Security consultant, they "err on the side of caution, and shipper thought might be restricted".

When they were relisted, by TWO separate and different eBay seller, (who somehow "coincidentally" had the same last name and both happened to receive my "seized" sets,) they were listed exactly as the original sellers had listed as bovine or cow bone.

There was no restricted other material either, as one set came in a tin box and other set was NOT in a restricted wood,  like mahogany or rosewood. I was reassured by both original sellers, who are experienced antique dealers and sellers, that there were no restricted items at all in either set.

The issue I am raising is that eBay with GSP partner Pitney Bowes is engaging in bad faith business practice, if an item can just be "thought" to be restricted, and "seized" without any proof or evidence or expert opinion sought, and then sold basically on the same platform that "deemed" them restricted?! How is this not potentially open to abuse? How is this appropriate legitimate business practice? Both sets were basically taken from me instead of being shipped through and I am being told they can be sold to other people without my consent, when there was in fact NO RESTRICTED material.
Sorry, I am not yelling. I am emphasizing the real issue.  Maybe I should add photos to show the items for clarity? I understand everything you wrote, but none of that applies here. I respect what you are saying, just wanted to clarify, there was no restricted material in original sale. 

[followsunmoontruth]

Thank you for basically saying you have had a similar experience.

Should I post this somewhere else? My case is unusual in that I can prove definitively the sets are the same "seized" sets.

Maybe I should post pictures? 

Also unusual,  because two people took sets two sets seized and subsequently relisted exactly the same as the original sellers' descriptions etc, so clearly there was no restricted material or they could not post on eBay.

Also the fact that two sellers, with the SAME last name, posted to their different eBay listings my two seized sets. Clearly there is activity inside the system. 

[marnotom!]

This is information from a US-based freight forwarder, but it may apply here, as well.  It states that:

• Items containing animal products controlled under the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, or requiring a permit under CITES

are internationally unshippable from the US, and I would presume that if it requires a permit under CITES that that would be the case from the UK as well.

You may simply have been lucky with the items that you received by other shipment methods.

[followsunmoontruth]

Hello,

I am aware of the CITES and all restricted items described under that act and that is not the case of any of the materials that we are discussing here.

Bovine bone and cow bone is not restricted first of all, and most of these sets also were produced well before the required documentation in most instances, as several different dates came into effect at different times for different species. 

I have actually been in touch with Fish and Wildlife over certain materials, due to my concern and learned that some items have been permitted again. For example, items with mother of pearl decoration, are permitted based on age and oercentage of shell, even without CITES permit. I will try and find a link to the UK antique dealers website that shows the lifted restrictions, which was welcome news in antique circles in UK and post it here.

It is very edifying, as what Pitney Bowes is doing is actually against UK customs practices for example. I trust Customs over Pitney Bowes and would not argue if it was sized by customs. These are distinct and separate organizations and that is not what I am disputing here

Thanks for your post and hope my reply clarifies what I am saying

[followsunmoontruth]

Hello Lotz,

The system won't let me post in a different location, as only one post with same content can go up. I have posted to UK, US and Canada eBay community websites however. 

Lots of people trying to explain how eBay and Pitney Bowes justified in doing this, and keep explaining CITES rules which I am very aware of and none of these apply to my situation. Pitney Bowes is not actually following the actual customs laws set by UK government and that is the issue. 

I should post a link to the UK antique dealers association, which outlines all the rules that dealers need to be aware of when importing and exporting goods, and since this is an authorized and endorsed website for all antique dealers, I have supreme faith they know what they are talking about. 

That is my concern. Pitney Bowes GSP and by extension eBay are not even following the Customs export/ import restrictions of the respective countries. I hope that clarifies my frustration with this situation. 

[reallynicestamps]

Yes.

Your shipment was being handled by a line worker who has been told to be especially careful about products that are bone or "vegetable ivory" (Phytelephas  and tagua) since crooks and poachers will deliberately use these descriptions to fence their forbidden ivory.

My only advice since you do understand the CITES restrictions thoroughly, is not to try to import any bone or vegetable ivory (or obviously elephant ivory) unless the seller can supply all the paperwork mentioned in the link above.

And even then, keep all your fingers and toes crossed until the items are in your hands.

[followsunmoontruth]

Hello,

Yes, that is my concern.

The person making this rather arbitrary decision to "confiscate" an item is someone who is not an expert or has no understanding of CITEs, or the difference between very good dense cow bone (or bovine bone) and ivory. 

After the sets were seized, I had contacted someone at the Security department at eBay, and I specifically requested that they get someone who was an authorized person, to provide me with evidence or documentation for the basis of the seizure.

Clearly, given the relisting of the two sets, using the exact same words of the original,  nothing untoward was found, so all the people saying you need to know CITES and ivory is not permitted is not understanding that there was in fact NO RESTRICTED material.

So my question, my concern, my issue is what is to stop this arbitrary process from occurring. Crossing your fingers when you legitimately purchase something is not how a business should be run. 

This needs to be escalated, but clearly eBay is not motivated to address the problem. I am hoping to get people to complain enough to add another step or have a professional intermediation to make the correct decision BEFORE things are "seized"

[lacemaker3]

---

@followsunmoontruth wrote:

Hello,

Yes, that is my concern.

...

Clearly, given the relisting of the two sets, using the exact same words of the original,  nothing untoward was found, so all the people saying you need to know CITES and ivory is not permitted is not understanding that there was in fact NO RESTRICTED material.

...

---

It has already been explained that this argument doesn't hold water. That is what always happens with items that are rejected for  international shipping through the GSP. They are resold, with domestic shipping only, using the same pictures and description. It means that eBay knows they are legal for domestic sales, and are not probhibited items. Just not accepted by the GSP.

The Global Shipping Programme in the UK is not willing to take on the risk of shipping these items that might be ivory over international borders. There isn't anything more to say about it. Their programme, their rules. No matter how much you rant about it.

It's been happening for years. People have been complaining for years. It hasn't changed.

You're getting the same answer in all three countries. It's not going to change.

You can sign up with a freight forwarder and buy them that way.

[followsunmoontruth]

So you are also saying the issue is Pitney Bowes GSP ? I agree

Someone said on another forum that sellers stating "Bovine bone" is a red flag and a euphemism for ivory. Not true

Others say, I don't understand CITES. Not true, that is why items need to be described by type of animal part, because CITES requires a specific description for export or import, therefor bovine bone or cow bone is necessary as part of invoice

Others say the resolution is you got refunded money or accept that reselling is permitted if done domestically. Refunding does not change what occurred, nor does selling the item within the country

None of these is the issue. Goods were seized without reason. Denied to the legitimate buyer, who is supported by original sellers. No explanation or ability to appeal is part of the process. It isn't transparent, nor can there be any chance of recovery of goods. BUT it is ok for the eBay system and GSP to turn around and sell these items off? 

People are saying this system is ok? That is the issue

I feel like many of the users who have been posting sound exactly like all the eBay staff that I have dealt with and these non answers, like you got a refund, are just repetitions of the eBay party line, so I wonder how many posters are actually employed by eBay? 

[followsunmoontruth]

Thank you for your advice. I understand I may be tilting at windmills.

A few things, I have not yet clearly shared and stated, as lots of people are telling me about CITES restrictions and UK import/ export etc etc as if I am unaware.

The elephant in the room, to forgive my pun, is that I may have been singled out. I am of Asian ancestry and have a Chinese last name, even though I actually am a fourth generation Canadian. Is there an assumption because of my background I am trying to buy an illegal and restricted material?

One set is in a tin box and the Haversian lines which indicate bovine bone, can be clearly seen in a photo. I will try figure out how to upload pictures while maintaining privacy, as this will clearly show how inappropriate the actions were. If anyone can see Haversian lines and they still took the set in the tin box, how can that be explained?

There is no CITES restriction on cow bone or bamboo that is circa 1920-1947, as both sets taken were early examples of that era.

Even if the set in the wooden slide box was made from a now restricted wood, (which it is NOT), as an antique it is under the required amount of wood weight for exemption, and is well past the age of required documentation.

However, the antique dealer, who I trust and believe knows her stuff, says it is an ordinary wood slide box, similar to thousands of other slide box Mah Jong sets that have been, and continue to be, bought and sold and shipped internationally daily. All without any concerns.

Since both sets have been listed again as bovine bone, and one is in a tin box showing Haversian lines even in the eBay photo, why did these sets get “seized”? Was this random? Doesn’t appear to be.

So why have these two sets been confiscated?

A third set, which was also confiscated by GSP Pitney Bowes, but in US, was similar to the other two sets, and now clearly proven to be cow bone and not a restricted material?

So I have been randomly unlucky three times and all sets in the end proven to be bovine bone or the eBay sellers could not list them.

All are not CITES restricted material, as cow bone, vintage bamboo and generic wood slide boxes are nowhere on the CITES lists.

I hope that answers some peoples questions about why I am raising this concern. It is not a rare material in these sets that makes them valuable to me.

These are cultural artefacts from the heyday of Mah Jong craze around the world and more significantly, were produced at a time, during the 1920s when countries around the world, including US and Canada, had enacted legislation that Excluded all Chinese immigration from 1923 until long after WWII.

[marnotom!]

---

@followsunmoontruth wrote:

Goods were seized without reason. Denied to the legitimate buyer, who is supported by original sellers. No explanation or ability to appeal is part of the process. It isn't transparent, nor can there be any chance of recovery of goods. BUT it is ok for the eBay system and GSP to turn around and sell these items off? 

---

Your goods went unforwarded for a reason.  You may not like the reason or it may not make sense to you, but Pitney Bowes (or, more likely, an outfit subcontracted by Pitney Bowes) deemed that they were unforwardable.  I haven't checked the thread you started on .com today, but you did get some good responses along the lines of PB exercising a lot of caution when it comes to materials used in antique goods. 

Antiques actually weren't a supported category when the GSP was first rolled out, actually, and they still prove to be problematic for the program.  Another guess I have as to why these items weren't forwarded to Canada is that PB or their carriers were unable to insure these shipments due to their nature or age.  Or perhaps there was just a weird glitch in the listing that set off some automated alarm bells.  If you've got a few minutes, have a listen to the last piece in this eBay.com podcast.  It starts around 42:45:

https://community.ebay.com/t5/eBay-for-Business/Episode-160-Part-3-Tracking-Your-Social-Campaign/ba-...

As for the "okayness" of eBay/GSP selling off impounded items, it's one of the options given for unforwardable items in the terms and conditions you agreed to by using the service.  Again, you may not like this and feel it's not okay, but you are given warning.  Also, keep in mind that the item isn't considered yours until it's successfully delivered, and I think that holds true of all shipments, not just those handled by the GSP or its US successor eBay International Shipping.

[lotzofuniquegoodies]

@marnotom! 

@followsunmoontruth 

I've seen this mentioned numerous occasions but to my mind it doesn't seem to track. Shouldn't it be on the seller to confirm what can and can't be sold? That goes for domestically and internationally. Dangerous goods & banned items. Versus the explanation that it's 100% the buyer's responsibility? eBay pulls listings down regularly with no warning or a very limited explanation. This would prevent buyers from purchasing these items and then having them go half the way and be confiscated. Buyers still could ask a seller if they ship a certain item and seller could explain the reason why insteady of the insanity going on now.

As a side, a couple of years ago, in attempting to purchase a map (via GSP) seller discovered shipping tubes were a no no and cancelled. Reason, there was nothing built into GSP to handle the couple of bucks of extra cost to post. Due dilligence unfortunatately if you want to SELL on eBay? The problems happen when eBay washes their hands half way through the process.

-Lotz

[marnotom!]

---

@lotzofuniquegoodies wrote:

@marnotom! 

@followsunmoontruth 

I've seen this mentioned numerous occasions but to my mind it doesn't seem to track. Shouldn't it be on the seller to confirm what can and can't be sold? That goes for domestically and internationally. Dangerous goods & banned items. Versus the explanation that it's 100% the buyer's responsibility? 

---

It depends on whether you're looking at this from a retail perspective or an import/export/customs/logistics perspective, @lotzofuniquegoodies.

---

@lotzofuniquegoodies wrote:

As a side, a couple of years ago, in attempting to purchase a map (via GSP) seller discovered shipping tubes were a no no and cancelled. Reason, there was nothing built into GSP to handle the couple of bucks of extra cost to post. Due dilligence unfortunatately if you want to SELL on eBay? The problems happen when eBay washes their hands half way through the process.

---

How would one be able to code a subroutine for the GSP bot to identify listings where shipping tubes are being employed?

[followsunmoontruth]

Hey, To anyone who is interested in learning more about whether ivory or cow bone used…

Here is a link to a UK magazine article where an antique dealer, who specializes in collecting Mah Jong sets talks about how most people are convinced their sets are ivory,

but he states “I have never seen an ivory set. Jade yes, but not ivory.”

Seems lots of people are mistaken and believe these to be ivory  and that was the idea behind using good quality dense bone for the best sets. It mimics the look and feel of ivory. 

So my concern is what process is used to determine whether or not it is ivory. Since I was specifically told by an eBay Security and Policy enforcement person, (immediately after the seizure of the goods) they "err on the side of caution" that is my issue. Who determines and are they qualified to judge? 

If not, then this is an unfair and opaque process, and open to abuse. It is not an objective, fact or evidence based approach, which should be the basis for any business organization to be able to have credibility. My point which seems to be missed, is where is the accountability for the process. If there were indeed restricted materials, ok, take the item. But since it does not seem to contain any restricted materials, what was the basis for the action? 

Please read the article as it supports what some people know and understand to be true

https://www.homesandantiques.com/antiques/collecting-guides-antiques/experts/luke-honeys-cabinet-of-...

[pjcdn2005]

I doubt that the shipping center has any experts on how to distingush bone from ivory but it seems that they have made an arbritary decision to refuse to ship anything that 'may' be a problem. For a while the gsp refused to ship all guitars just because some were made with a specific wood.  We read many posts about guitars that had been confisicated though I haven't heard of any situations like that in a few years.  I don't agree with they handle it but the GSP and now the EIS has always worked like that.

[followsunmoontruth]

Thank you for your post and adding to the conversation. Yes, I have understood this has been happening for awhile and everybody has given up on protesting the practice.

I am a newish buyer and I guess my expectation is that all laws and rules and regulations would be followed in the same way eBay expects us to conform. And rightly so

However, when all information was checked and goods seemed to pass all checks and balances, including all sellers' assurances these are cow bone etc etc, how do you buy goods and just gamble they won't be randomly deemed "restricted" by someone not actually qualified to discern?

One blogger suggested you just cross your fingers! 

I will post more information about Mah Jong sets because if eBay and Pitney Bowes GSP is given the power to randomly "seize" goods, then this should at least be fact based, or evidence based, not "feeling" based or subjectively decided by random people.

Or based on a mistaken assumption that "bovine bone" is code for ivory! 

After two sets were confiscated, I requested this case be escalated to eBay Security and higher. I actually talked at length with a Security and Policy  enforcement consultant. We actually looked at one of the seized sets together online. (This for the bloggers who asked what process was followed, and you don't know what they did etc)

I walked him through websites that had many hundreds of Mah Jong sets in simple slide boxes, with identical types of carved tiles (including horse joker tiles). We also examined one of the original photographs showing a close up of the tile. He said see, this shows it's ivory, and I said, no those are the lines of the bamboo.

Is an AI bot looking at photos, and seeing lines and flagging this as Schreger lines (distinctive lines only founded on ivory), and misidentifying the bamboo part of the tile instead?

I carefully explained there were no Schreger lines and said, since this set is still at hub in Leicester, Can you please ask that someone who actually knows and understands ivory, examine it? Can you give me some evidence, as I will accept the outcome, if it proves to be ivory.

This is when I was told it was gone, they err on the side of caution, and it is likely destroyed.

I still truly don't think these sets are ivory (see article posted about how antique dealer states, "never seen an ivory set.") but still unable to show proof either. 

Ironically, after asking for help from the dealers etc, that's when I found out this has happened to many. But I could also not find any information about how items "seized" may be sold on or destroyed, as the GSP UK website didn't state that, only may refund money. 

One specialized Mah Jong dealer examined all the photos in the listing and the same close up picture if the tile flagged by the Security, and he gave as evidence stating you can clearly see Haversian lines indicating cow bone! 

I am leery of using words "bovine bone" because according to many bloggers on eBay US this is code for ivory and some suggestion that perhaps I was knowingly participating in illegal trade!

I do understand the policies and procedures, despite others comments

My concern is a questionable and flawed process to decide in the first place and then secondly, if these were then reposted as cow bone on eBay by another seller, to me it appears there was no justification for the first action, which was "seizing" the goods. Furthermore, it happened 3 times in less than two months.

Since an expert MahJong dealer says he has "never seen an ivory set" what are the odds I found three and bought them in less than a two month period, and was unlucky enough to have them all seized?!

But only by GSP Pitney Bowes? 

All other bovine bone sets I have purchased passed through Canada customs and every other export countries customs, including Australia, Netherlands, UK, US.

I suggest again that eBay and Pitney Bowes look at their policies and procedures and make fact or evidence based decisions, or create an appeal process or other intermediate step in cases where the buyer and seller want answers.

Again, I wholeheartedly agree with following rules and guidelines, but these need to be clear, fair and transparent, not luck of the draw.

I apologize for the length of the post, but feel the history and context of what occurred is important, including trying to get answers before the sets were disposed of, in understanding my concerns and the actions I took to try to get direct answers.

[marnotom!]

The facts are that any goods carrier has the right to restrict carriage of any good they choose for whatever reason.  The Global Shipping Program could refuse to forward wooden pencils out of the UK and it would be perfectly within its rights to do so.

As I think was noted on the thread you started on the .com discussion boards, Pitney Bowes is the "importer of record" of items forwarded through the program, not the buyer.  Items handled by the GSP and eIS go through a customs pre-clearance process in the country of origin to (in theory) expedite their passage through customs in the destination country.  Pitney Bowes is skating on financial thin ice and it doesn't want to take the chance of having to contest an import or trade violation because someone managed to sneak questionable materials through one of its contracted shippers.

You're looking at this matter from a customs/import-export perspective.  I think most of us here are looking at this more from a business perspective.  The GSP seems to have been set up in a manner to minimize the use of highly paid "experts" and instead its contracted workers are referring to a limited set of parameters in combination with a bit of AI to make the decisions on items' suitability for export through the program.

If you want to see something mind-boggling, have a look at the USPS list of prohibited and restricted items for export by mail to Italy.  There's been debate in the past on how up to date and accurate it is, but most of those odd items, such as typewriter ribbons, have been there since I started on eBay over twenty years ago:

https://pe.usps.com/text/imm/il_008.htm

Keep in mind that it's a list of items that supposedly can't be mailed to Italy from the US, not necessarily exported.  And it's the same deal with the GSP.  Just because the item is perfectly legally and meets all codes, regulations, and requirements, doesn't mean that it's shippable by any method out there.  (Perfume's a good example of this.)