November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session

Hello everyone,

 

Welcome to our weekly chat. This week, the thread will remain open until tomorrow as usual.

 

Open issues:

  • Browse pages and Search pages showing different results for same category
  • "Apply my Combined Shipping Discounts" option unavailable on Revise
  • Incomplete ID History
  • Link to Community located on Feedback page points to eBay.com
  • Some Search pages show watchers, some don't
  • Items missing from combined invoice
  • Request Total unavailable

Updates:

  • Search results page shows shipping costs inconsistent with what's on the item pages - Shipping team working to fix
  • Shipping Calculator returning erroneous rates - Report sent to Pitney Bowes and Canada Post for investigation
  • RESOLVED - Economy Shipping from Outside the US giving wrong EDDs (7-14 biz days instead of 11-23)
  • Selling limits live items count discrepancy - We are investigating further.
  • Missing Tracked Packet destinationsstill no update from PayPal and Pitney Bowes
  • Combined shipping offers not shown to international buyers - ticket open

If anything is missing, please let me know. Thanks!

Message 1 of 104
latest reply
103 REPLIES 103

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


@rose-dee wrote:

raphael@ebay.com wrote:

Allow me to start by sorting a few things out. Most importantly, it should be noted that it is not eBay's mandate to enforce the CASL law beyond our interaction with our own customers. In other words, it's not our place to tell sellers whether they can or can't contact buyers under CASL. With that said, we do have a fee avoidance policy which says a seller shouldn't be directly contacting buyers whom they met via an eBay transaction in an attempt to conduct business outside of eBay.

 

What I'm trying to illustrate is, these are two separate things and shouldn't be confused as being connected in any way. the Canadian government enforces CASL, eBay enforces its own policies. I hope that clears any contradiction concerns. 

 

So, the question whether sellers are allowed to email buyers after a first transaction needs to be looked at from two different angles. From an eBay policy standpoint, it would be considered fee avoidance since the original connection was made via eBay. We would expect fees for the service of connecting the two parties in order to make a sale/purchase. From an anti-spam law standpoint, that's not eBay's place to regulate or enforce, so if a buyer had concerns that they are being spammed by a seller, they would need to report that to the appropriate authorities. I posted a link to the government website for CASL in my response to Maureen's post on this topic.


I realize and appreciate that you are in a position where you must represent and protect eBay, so I understand this response, but it doesn't address the issue I raised.  

 

The two rules (eBay's internal policies and the CASL) are very much connected if there is a clash in real life situations.  Let me provide an example.  

 

An eBay seller is downgraded (or ejected) by eBay as a result of complaints by buyers about being contacted (entirely outside of eBay, i.e. through private email) at some point after a transaction.  The seller loses income as a result and applies to a court of appropriate jurisdiction to make a ruling based on the permissive provisions of CASL, presumably for reinstatement as a seller on eBay.  The seller would most likely win that case. 

 

So the issue as I see it is not the fact of the post-transaction contact itself, but whether contact took place within eBay (or using its facilities) or completely outside.  The following suggests that eBay's rules would take precedence over CASL, even if the post-transaction contact were entirely outside eBay, merely because the email address of the buyer originated in the eBay transaction.  If so, eBay's internal policies are in contradiction with Canada's laws.  There is only one angle -- Canada's laws -- that can pertain.  

 

 "So, the question whether sellers are allowed to email buyers after a first transaction needs to be looked at from two different angles. From an eBay policy standpoint, it would be considered fee avoidance since the original connection was made via eBay." 

 

As for fee avoidance, I don't recall sellers having to sign a perpetually applicable non-disclosure agreement (a legal nullity in any event), nor even a time-limited one.  As I see it, this is the risk a site like eBay must take if it wants to do business -- sellers provide eBay with product, advertising (listings) and service to buyers, and eBay provides buyer information to facilitate those transactions.  It can't hang on to those connections forever.  Frankly other selling venues have never been quite as paranoid on this score as eBay has been for many years. 

 

By the way, I'm not intending to put you on the spot with this.  I know the only answer you can give must protect eBay's interests.  I just want to state that there is a legal discrepancy here that only an independent authority would be in a position to address fairly, and that that is my view of this issue.  Unfortunately, there is not yet enough case law on the subject to provide a clear answer.  


rose-dee, let's not get carried away shall we? Respectfully, your assessment of how CASL works is wrong.

 

The Fee Avoidance policy is in place because eBay spends literally millions of dollars to ensure that buyers come to the site to buy items offered by our sellers. Naturally, we don't like it when sellers leverage this in order to drive off-eBay sales. This rule is explicitly stated in our User Agreement. If it came to that, the seller would be suspended under an eBay policy, no connection with CASL what so ever.

 

CASL is just an anti-spam law in Canada, it could never be invoked in court to overturn eBay's decision to restrict or suspend a seller who breached the Fee Avoidance policy (or any other pol,icy for that matter).

 

When it comes to eBay's observance of CASL law, this concerns eBay's communications with its customers only. If a seller, having obtained a buyer's email address from a previous eBay transaction with that buyer, was found in breach of CASL, they would face the consequences themselves, with no connection to eBay.

 

Lastly, I really don't see what you think I'm protecting eBay from by saying this. Everything I said is totally factual and not spun in a way to protect anyone.

Message 81 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


raphael@ebay.com wrote:

It's impossible for me to tell without seeing the actual order.


 

Wow, thanks.  So what this buyer says is true then?  That sellers can alter dates afterward when a buyer inquires about the item??  This way they can fool buyers past the claim time???  Wow. 

 

That will make a difference in how regular board users respond to buyers' questions so it's good to know. 

 

https://community.ebay.ca/t5/Buying-on-eBay/Why-are-there-two-different-Estimated-Delivery-Date-dead...

 

 

Message 82 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


@tobyshitzu wrote:

ebay has recently made a change to media listing that makies it much more difficult

 

"

The stock photo from the eBay catalogue won't appear in your listing because the condition of this item is not new.
"

 

Media items were specifically exempted from the "stock photo" on used items being the photo is just the cover art.  The competing site puts all the new and used items as one entry with one picture.  Why woulfd ebay do this, it will make listing a  bunch of used games etc take much longer with pics that will be the same thing anyway?


We are requiring that used items be listed with photos of the actual item son that buyers know what they are buying. If the competition employs different, less transparent practices, that's their business.

Message 83 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session

No, that EDD is logged on the Order History. A seller can change whatever is still live for that listing but the purchase will always be noted with a line like, "The seller has updated this listing since your purchase, to see what you bought, click here...'

Message 84 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


raphael@ebay.com wrote:

@rose-dee wrote:

raphael@ebay.com wrote:

Allow me to start by sorting a few things out. Most importantly, it should be noted that it is not eBay's mandate to enforce the CASL law beyond our interaction with our own customers. In other words, it's not our place to tell sellers whether they can or can't contact buyers under CASL. With that said, we do have a fee avoidance policy which says a seller shouldn't be directly contacting buyers whom they met via an eBay transaction in an attempt to conduct business outside of eBay.

 

What I'm trying to illustrate is, these are two separate things and shouldn't be confused as being connected in any way. the Canadian government enforces CASL, eBay enforces its own policies. I hope that clears any contradiction concerns. 

 

So, the question whether sellers are allowed to email buyers after a first transaction needs to be looked at from two different angles. From an eBay policy standpoint, it would be considered fee avoidance since the original connection was made via eBay. We would expect fees for the service of connecting the two parties in order to make a sale/purchase. From an anti-spam law standpoint, that's not eBay's place to regulate or enforce, so if a buyer had concerns that they are being spammed by a seller, they would need to report that to the appropriate authorities. I posted a link to the government website for CASL in my response to Maureen's post on this topic.


I realize and appreciate that you are in a position where you must represent and protect eBay, so I understand this response, but it doesn't address the issue I raised.  

 

The two rules (eBay's internal policies and the CASL) are very much connected if there is a clash in real life situations.  Let me provide an example.  

 

An eBay seller is downgraded (or ejected) by eBay as a result of complaints by buyers about being contacted (entirely outside of eBay, i.e. through private email) at some point after a transaction.  The seller loses income as a result and applies to a court of appropriate jurisdiction to make a ruling based on the permissive provisions of CASL, presumably for reinstatement as a seller on eBay.  The seller would most likely win that case. 

 

So the issue as I see it is not the fact of the post-transaction contact itself, but whether contact took place within eBay (or using its facilities) or completely outside.  The following suggests that eBay's rules would take precedence over CASL, even if the post-transaction contact were entirely outside eBay, merely because the email address of the buyer originated in the eBay transaction.  If so, eBay's internal policies are in contradiction with Canada's laws.  There is only one angle -- Canada's laws -- that can pertain.  

 

 "So, the question whether sellers are allowed to email buyers after a first transaction needs to be looked at from two different angles. From an eBay policy standpoint, it would be considered fee avoidance since the original connection was made via eBay." 

 

As for fee avoidance, I don't recall sellers having to sign a perpetually applicable non-disclosure agreement (a legal nullity in any event), nor even a time-limited one.  As I see it, this is the risk a site like eBay must take if it wants to do business -- sellers provide eBay with product, advertising (listings) and service to buyers, and eBay provides buyer information to facilitate those transactions.  It can't hang on to those connections forever.  Frankly other selling venues have never been quite as paranoid on this score as eBay has been for many years. 

 

By the way, I'm not intending to put you on the spot with this.  I know the only answer you can give must protect eBay's interests.  I just want to state that there is a legal discrepancy here that only an independent authority would be in a position to address fairly, and that that is my view of this issue.  Unfortunately, there is not yet enough case law on the subject to provide a clear answer.  


rose-dee, let's not get carried away shall we? Respectfully, your assessment of how CASL works is wrong.

 

The Fee Avoidance policy is in place because eBay spends literally millions of dollars to ensure that buyers come to the site to buy items offered by our sellers. Naturally, we don't like it when sellers leverage this in order to drive off-eBay sales. This rule is explicitly stated in our User Agreement. If it came to that, the seller would be suspended under an eBay policy, no connection with CASL what so ever.

 

CASL is just an anti-spam law in Canada, it could never be invoked in court to overturn eBay's decision to restrict or suspend a seller who breached the Fee Avoidance policy (or any other pol,icy for that matter).

 

When it comes to eBay's observance of CASL law, this concerns eBay's communications with its customers only. If a seller, having obtained a buyer's email address from a previous eBay transaction with that buyer, was found in breach of CASL, they would face the consequences themselves, with no connection to eBay.

 

Lastly, I really don't see what you think I'm protecting eBay from by saying this. Everything I said is totally factual and not spun in a way to protect anyone.


HEAR! HEAR! 

Message 85 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


@mjwl2006 wrote:

No, that EDD is logged on the Order History. A seller can change whatever is still live for that listing but the purchase will always be noted with a line like, "The seller has updated this listing since your purchase, to see what you bought, click here...'


 

Then how do we explain that buyer query?  There are TWO people saying this happened.  I was hoping for an official response and it sounds to me like a "maybe, it all depends".  So that's important to know. 

 

Message 86 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


@i.am.vivian wrote:

raphael@ebay.com wrote:

It's impossible for me to tell without seeing the actual order.


 

Wow, thanks.  So what this buyer says is true then?  That sellers can alter dates afterward when a buyer inquires about the item??  This way they can fool buyers past the claim time???  Wow. 

 

That will make a difference in how regular board users respond to buyers' questions so it's good to know. 

 

https://community.ebay.ca/t5/Buying-on-eBay/Why-are-there-two-different-Estimated-Delivery-Date-dead...

 

 


Please, I never said that. The only way a seller can influence the EDDs is by adjusting their handling time, which is prominently shown to buyers on the listing before they buy. There are no sneaky ways a seller can extend their EDDs after the fact. Please take note of this. And please don't put words in my mouth.

 

What the person said on the thread you linked to is 100% wrong. But you asked me which out of two dates was the correct one, but I can't answer that without knowing what order we are talking about, something that isn't seen anywhere.

 

I hope this clears things up.

Message 87 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


@i.am.vivian wrote:

@mjwl2006 wrote:

No, that EDD is logged on the Order History. A seller can change whatever is still live for that listing but the purchase will always be noted with a line like, "The seller has updated this listing since your purchase, to see what you bought, click here...'


 

Then how do we explain that buyer query?  There are TWO people saying this happened.  I was hoping for an official response and it sounds to me like a "maybe, it all depends".  So that's important to know. 

 


Once again: I can't tell which out of two estimated delivery dates is the correct one unless I can see the actual item and order details. That info was never provided.

Message 88 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session

I would have to see screenshots of precisely what the buyer is looking at in order to concoct a satisfactory explanation. It's an easy thing to misinterpret if the buyer isn't savvy. There are nuances to look for that may explain what they are seeing. Or not.

 

(Edit: please note the reply was meant in response to vivian.)

Message 89 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


raphael@ebay.com wrote:
The only way a seller can influence the EDDs is by adjusting their handling time, which is prominently shown to buyers on the listing before they buy. There are no sneaky ways a seller can extend their EDDs after the fact. Please take note of this. And please don't put words in my mouth.

 

What the person said on the thread you linked to is 100% wrong. But you asked me which out of two dates was the correct one, but I can't answer that without knowing what order we are talking about, something that isn't seen anywhere.

 

I hope this clears things up.



Sorry, I did not intend to put anything into any part of your body, I simply sought a straight forward clear answer.  TWO people said the seller can alter dates after the fact when a buyer makes and inquiry.  Your answer suggested you would have to see the actual order to be sure. 

 

Message 90 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


@i.am.vivian wrote:

raphael@ebay.com wrote:
The only way a seller can influence the EDDs is by adjusting their handling time, which is prominently shown to buyers on the listing before they buy. There are no sneaky ways a seller can extend their EDDs after the fact. Please take note of this. And please don't put words in my mouth.

 

What the person said on the thread you linked to is 100% wrong. But you asked me which out of two dates was the correct one, but I can't answer that without knowing what order we are talking about, something that isn't seen anywhere.

 

I hope this clears things up.



Sorry, I did not intend to put anything into any part of your body, I simply sought a straight forward clear answer.  TWO people said the seller can alter dates after the fact when a buyer makes and inquiry.  Your answer suggested you would have to see the actual order to be sure. 

 


That's exactly what I said: I need to see the order if I'm going to tell which date is correct. As of now I still don't know what item we are talking about, what was the shipping service and the seller's handling time. Without that info how can I say if the November or the December date is correct? I don't even know when the sale was concluded.

 

This is as straight an answer as I can give until I get the appropriate info. To draw a parallel, if I was a doctor and you asked me if your friend will live, I wouldn't be able to answer unless I examined your friend myself.

Message 91 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session

Is it not possible that this pair of examples with conflicting EDDs are fallout from the corrected EDDs on ebay.com from a few weeks ago? Maybe the buyer made the purchase when the EDD was still too short, and is now looking at the correct EDD. And not understanding the reason it changed. 

Message 92 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


@mjwl2006 wrote:

Is it not possible that this pair of examples with conflicting EDDs are fallout from the corrected EDDs on ebay.com from a few weeks ago? Maybe the buyer made the purchase when the EDD was still too short, and is now looking at the correct EDD. And not understanding the reason it changed. 


That is possible, but again without knowing which transaction we are talking about it's impossible to know for sure.

Message 93 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session

Is it to late for me to lob in another question?

Message 94 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session

I'm going to throw it in as quickly as I can. 

 

There was an instance on the Discussion Board where a buyer opened an INR on paypal on the first business day, the morning the seller was ready to ship it. Does an open INR on paypal also mean a case is open on ebay? 

Message 95 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session

It's described in detail here with all kinds of conflicting advice for the seller to whom this occurred. I think we're all struggling to understand how this kind of thing would happen and how best the seller should have handled it. 

 

http://community.ebay.ca/t5/Seller-Central/quot-ITEM-NOT-RECEIVED-quot-CLAIM-FILED-ON-FIRST-BUSINESS...

Message 96 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session

I know of a bookseller on eBay as well as elsewhere that uses a scanner to  prepare photos for his listings of books.... thousands upon thousands of books, and he did and still does very well... has done so for decades

 

There are too many booksellers on eBay that are playing games with picture policy  or  are listing without a true gallery photo for books, or without.a photo, as no photo/image at all.... and made times they say... no image or no photo available.

 

It is like they do not know how to use a camera or a scanner

 

 

It is like I said....

 

If they have trouble with picture policy on eBay.com or eBay.ca

 

then eBay's half.com is for them

 

and... also.... Those booksellers with only a few books to list,  that is less than 5,000 listings, one with about 30 listings,  are beginning to do the same as  those booksellers with thousands  and thousands... and up to millions of books....  no gallery photo or a phony gallery photo.

 

 

Picture Policy is eBay policy..... and... all eBay policies must be enforced to the same degree or there is a measure of a problem... on the whole of eBay.... all categories..

Message 97 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session


@mjwl2006 wrote:

I'm going to throw it in as quickly as I can. 

 

There was an instance on the Discussion Board where a buyer opened an INR on paypal on the first business day, the morning the seller was ready to ship it. Does an open INR on paypal also mean a case is open on ebay? 


The claims systems are independent, opening a claim on PP doesn't open a claim on eBay. However, it may become impossible to open a claim on eBay if a claim is open on PayPal for the same item. We only allow one claim for the same transaction.

Message 98 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session

The seller called Paypal for advice (and also an explanation as to how a INR case could be open on the first business day) and was told to ship it. So she did. Other people are saying the seller should have canceled it and issued the buyer a refund. But the buyer at no time asked for one, she just opened an INR on paypal out of the blue. If the seller had canceled and refunded on ebay, instead of shipping, would she have gotten a defect for cancelling an order without buyer consent? We are of conflicting opinions with this, as to how it should best have been handled. I'm puzzled by the whole scenario, beginning with the reason paypal let the buyer open an INR on Monday morning after a weekend purchase. 

Message 99 of 104
latest reply

November 23rd 2016 Weekly Session

As you mentioned in that thread I suspect that the buyer was trying to open a claim after the first eta, not the last date.   I wish people wouldn't think that those dates are written in stone...so many of  them don't seem to realize what 'estimated' means.

Message 100 of 104
latest reply