Confused

[cooleastmarket]

Hi,

Can you advise me?  One of my products fits on a bare foot.  I do not accept returns for obvious hygienic reasons.  There are clear measuring instructions on the listing.  Most people are fine with this.  

But now I have a customer who measured wrong and expected me to pay him to return the item and send him another pair at my expense.  

Besides losing money on the shipping both ways, I cannot resell the returned item as new.

But eBay seems to expect me to do this.   I've tried to talk to someone on the phone about it but after waiting on hold for 1/2 an hour, gave up.

He already left me bad feedback which I can't do much about and also has sent me insulting personal emails not through eBay. 

I'm only getting form emails from eBay, about how to refund him, etc.  No one addresses the hygienic concerns.

It's making me wonder if I should just quit ebay all together or at least stop selling this item.  It's not worth the trouble.

What do you think?

Thanks for your help,

Leslie

[rose-dee]

Unfortunately I'd say that the situation you have is one of the risks of selling the type of item you sell.  

If you are doing well otherwise with that product and it represents a significant part of your sales, it may be worth it to just cheerfully and promptly reimburse an occasional unhappy customer in order to avoid defects, and forget about having the buyer return the item (since you can't re-sell these items anyway).  

With eBay's new Money Back Guarantee, I think we all have to face the fact that buyers will be able to simply return any item that they claim is "not as described", even if the buyer is the source of the error (by not carefully reading the description).  I don't think eBay CS will side with you on this one.  

Personally, although I've managed to avoid such scenarios so far, I think it's inevitable, and I'm just resigning myself to absorbing such losses.  

[73rhc]

Return shipping is the buyer's responsibility, here. Listing states "no returns" and according to eBay's Money Back Guarantee the cost of return shipping is based on the the seller's return policy.

[rose-dee]

---

@73rhc wrote:
Return shipping is the buyer's responsibility, here. Listing states "no returns" and according to eBay's Money Back Guarantee the cost of return shipping is based on the the seller's return policy.

---

It's not quite that cut and dried under the new MBG.  

The problem is that if the buyer requests a refund or opens a case indicating the item is "not as described", the seller may have no recourse but to refund, even if the listing states there are no returns.  

This is because eBay relies on the buyer to determine what is "not as described" and will only reverse that designation if the seller can prove the item sent was exactly as it was described.  The problem the OP has here is -- how do you do that when you have (a) an uncooperative buyer and (b) the buyer still has the item.  Not very easily.

Here are the relevant excerpts, from the MBG:

"eBay Money Back Guarantee does not cover the following:

• Buyer's remorse or any reason other than not receiving an item or receiving an item that isn't as described in the listing (see the seller's return policy for return options)."     [There are additional non-coverage circumstances, but they don't apply to the OP's situation]. 

"Who decides if the purchase is significantly not as described?

• It is up to the buyer to initiate a request when they feel the item is not as described in the listing.

• If the buyer doesn't receive a response or solution, or returns the item but doesn't receive a refund or replacement from the seller, the buyer can ask us to step in and help.

• If asked to step in and help, we review the item description and any other information about the item that the buyer and seller provide. If we can't determine that the item matches the listing description, if the seller has already offered a return, or the seller's stated return window and policy applies, we may ask the buyer to return the item to the seller."

The upshot of all this is that buyers are able to initiate the MBG as long as they claim an item is not significantly as described (even if that's untrue) and there is very little a seller can do.  

The OP can spend hours on the phone with CS hoping to reverse this situation, but the reality is that stating "no returns" these days means "no returns only under certain circumstances", i.e. (from the MBG policy): 

"Do all sellers have to offer returns?

• No, sellers still have the choice of whether or not to offer returns through the returns policy. If a seller has chosen not to offer returns and a buyer requests a return because they changed their mind, sellers can simply decline the request. However, if a buyer received an item that was not as described in the listing and the buyer opens a case against the seller, the buyer has the right to return it for a full refund."

Here's the link to the MBG, for reference:  http://pages.ebay.ca/sellerinformation/news/fallupdate2014/ebaymoneybackguarantee.html

[73rhc]

What does eBay Money Back Guarantee cover?

The eBay Money Back Guarantee protects you in cases where an item is either not received or isn’t as described in the listing. It covers purchases paid with PayPal and most other electronic payment methods. The eBay Money Back Guarantee is not a product warranty.

The eBay Money Back Guarantee applies to virtually every item on www.ebay.ca. The only categories excluded are:

• Motors vehicles (which are already covered under the eBay Vehicle Protection program)
• Real estate
• Websites and businesses for sale
• Classified ads and services
• Some business equipment categories that may be covered by eBay Business Equipment Purchase Protection

The eBay Money Back Guarantee does not apply to websites other than www.ebay.ca.

Please note that, if return shipping is not payable by the seller in accordance with their return policy, the costs of returning the item are your responsibility.

Read the complete details about the eBay Money Back Guarantee

[73rhc]

In this particular case, how is the item "not as described"? The listing did not give shoe sizes, but dimensions. The description asks the buyer to measure their feet before choosing the size required. So, it could be argued that the MBG doesn't aplly, here.

[reallynicestamps]

Would the refund mean that the buyer would have the negative feedback removed?

I doubt it.

So the buyer has removed the only tool he has to encourage the seller to give the refund he demands.

I think refunding the original payment on return of the item is what the seller should go for.

That's pretty much the minimum required.

Rudeness and the negative, especially when the problem arose when the buyer did not measure correctly, would not encourage me as a seller to be more than minimally cooperative.

And of course, Blocked Buyer List.

As a parent, I firmly believe that anti-social and nasty behaviour must be stepped on promptly.

Returns and unusable goods are a cost of doing business. I hope you are doing well enough with your other more pleasant customers that this is just a tax deduction.

Politely.  - Captain Malcolm Reynolds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZ3k2xA1Wcw

[73rhc]

[73rhc]

No return or refund is really necessary.

[rose-dee]

---

@73rhc wrote:

What does eBay Money Back Guarantee cover?

The eBay Money Back Guarantee protects you in cases where an item is either not received or isn’t as described in the listing. 

Please note that, if return shipping is not payable by the seller in accordance with their return policy, the costs of returning the item are your responsibility.

---

I think you are getting confused between the voluntary acceptance of a seller of a buyer's request to return an item under the MBG (in which case the return is made according to the seller's return policy, i.e. if the seller's policy states buyer pays for return shipping), and the situation where the buyer has eBay step in (opens a case).  

In the latter instance, the seller is always responsible for return shipping under the MBG, as long as the buyer has opened the matter as either SNAD or INR.  The refund of the buyer's costs in returning the item comes out of the seller's pocket (Paypal).  

What I'm saying is that the MBG has effectively placed sellers in the position where they might as well agree to pay for return shipping right off the top to avoid having a SNAD/INR case opened and get the associated defect.  In other words, if you want to maintain your seller reputation, "no returns" is really quite meaningless now. 

Please see the excerpt from the MBG below.  

• What happens when I ask eBay to step in?

  If you haven’t received an item, we usually refund your money immediately via PayPal.

  If you received an item that wasn’t as described, we’ll typically help you return it to the seller first and then refund you.

As far as the buyer's claim in the OP's situation being a poor excuse, you're probably right that he/she didn't read the description.  That is irrelevant if the buyer makes a SNAD claim and the seller has no way to prove that the buyer is wrong.  How do you prove that the shoe the buyer has in their hands is in fact the shoe you listed and is exactly as described in the listing?  You can't.  

What it boils down to is that the OP has an unhappy customer.  That is true even if the buyer is a dolt who didn't bother to read the measurements and should be held responsible for his/her own negligence.  Sure, it would only be fair to expect the buyer to pay for his/her silliness by paying to return the item.  But that sort of seller payback isn't welcome on eBay anymore.  

I've been forced to become an "eBay realist".  I now do whatever is necessary to avoid defects, cases and complaints.  Insisting that such a buyer pay for returning the item may only result in the buyer escalating the matter to an open case (if there isn't already one), in which instance the seller will pay for the shipment anyway.

If the buyer has already left negative FB and low DSRs, then opening a case -- especially if it remains unresolved -- will simply add to the seller's troubles.  The seller may save a few dollars by insisting the buyer pay for shipping, but will risk gaining some demerits if the buyer balks and opens a case.  In the end I think the OP has to decide which is the lesser of two evils. 

[rose-dee]

---

@73rhc wrote:

---

Again, this is unless the buyer is dissatisfied with the seller's response and asks eBay to step in (i.e. opens a case).  I'm afraid you keep missing the point that all bets are off once the buyer makes a SNAD claim, because a seller will almost always be unable to prove the item is exactly as described if the item is still in the buyer's hands.

Please re-read the paragraph that is 2 lines above the green band in the photo you posted above:

"Sellers are only responsible for the return shipping cost ... if the item doesn't match the item description and a buyers opens a case against a seller."  

Then the seller pays for return shipping anyway and racks up an open case.  

Which would you prefer to risk -- a few dollars in shipping cost or another case, keeping in mind that the allowable limit for open cases is very, very low.  It doesn't take many to affect a seller's status. 

[73rhc]

Please read the the paragraph, as a whole. The area below the green section shows who pays for return shipping in the case of a dissatisfied buyer. You can argue all you like. But I will agree to disagree. Btw, all of these claims can be appealed. And I would be curious to know what the success rate us.

[cooleastmarket]

Thanks so much, friends, for helping me with this issue.

Not very happy with Ebay at this point but it seems I might as well refund the buyer and get on with my life. 

I will try to just send a refund.  He doesn't have to return the item since I can't sell it anyway.   

Best regards and Happy Selling,

Leslie

[rose-dee]

---

@73rhc wrote:
Please read the the paragraph, as a whole. The area below the green section shows who pays for return shipping in the case of a dissatisfied buyer. You can argue all you like. But I will agree to disagree. Btw, all of these claims can be appealed. And I would be curious to know what the success rate us.

---

Yes, I have read the policy quite a few times, mostly because I recognized the downside that it was going to mean for sellers.  

The green section shows who pays for return shipping in the case of a dissatisfied buyer, you're absolutely right, as long as that buyer doesn't open a case.  

In other words, a voluntary agreement between seller and buyer is fine, based on the seller's stated returns policy, as long as the buyer is happy to pay for the return.  If he becomes unhappy, with either the cost or the seller, he can open a case, claiming SNAD (which the seller can't disprove), and the seller will then pay for return shipping anyway.  I don't see that the seller has gained anything then except a very unhappy customer, some potentially unhappy FB, and an open case, and he'll be paying for the return shipping.  

If FB, DSRs, open cases and defects mean very little to you (for example if your volume is high enough), then it might make sense to insist upon enforcing your own return policy in these sorts of instances to save money in the short run. 

I hate to say this, but this whole subject may soon be moot: apparently the "Hassle Free Returns" programme will eventually apply to Canadian sellers, and we all know what that means -- MBG on steroids.

[73rhc]

Sorry to say, but this makes no sense. Why would eBay put a voluntary provision within their MDG guidelines. There would be no need. If buyer and seller voluntarily agree upon a return, then there is no reason to spell it out in MPG.

[rose-dee]

---

@73rhc wrote:
Sorry to say, but this makes no sense. Why would eBay put a voluntary provision within their MDG guidelines. There would be no need. If buyer and seller voluntarily agree upon a return, then there is no reason to spell it out in MPG.

---

To me, the reason is obvious -- to placate and mollify sellers, so they won't be as freaked out as they probably should be when they read the MBG.  In other words, telling sellers, don't worry, if you have a "nice" buyer who is cooperative, you can still work it out the old way... but otherwise here's what you're going to do.  

In other words, sellers are going to be dependent upon, and hoping for, the buyer's good graces when indicating that buyers have to pay return shipping.  Reading the MBG carefully will enlighten many buyers (and, in my view, will also encourage many to file a SNAD claim, knowing it will save them money, and knowing there won't be much the seller can do to dispute it). 

As I said before, I think what it boils down to is a choice that sellers are now being forced to make whenever they have an unhappy buyer - for whatever reason, really - who wants to return an item.  Sellers can either dig in their heels and insist upon their own returns policy (and risk a SNAD/defect/case opened), or take the hit and pay for the return shipping.  

It all depends on which is more important to a seller - hanging on to his/her seller status, or hanging onto a few more dollars.  I agree, it is a hard choice, but for my own situation, being a rather small volume seller, I can't afford to rack up any avoidable defects, so, well, I'll lose some money in order to be able to carry on selling.  

There may come a point where this trade-off is no longer tenable, I don't know.  I always say that eBay's next Big Idea (or Seller Update) may be the one that finishes me here (and probably a lot of other sellers too). 

[73rhc]

As confirmed by "pj" in another thread. The first three reasons are not eligible for snad!!! Therefore, the seller's return policy applies. As in the OP's situation. If glove doesn't fit, the buyer is in a snit. LOL