About Return Shipping Labels

[sylviebee]

I've posted about this before and I'm still not sure how to deal with this.

One recent version of eBay's messages to buyers when the seller has accepted the return is as follows:

""The seller is responsible for return shipping charges. Contact the seller for a return shipping label. If they can't provide one, you can purchase a label, and we'll ask the seller to reimburse you."""

I'm being instructed to pay for the label and then trust that the seller will reimburse me later.  I have no idea when "later" is.  Is that prior to shipping when I can still cancel the label if things don't come together, or after the seller receives the return?

Does that ever work?

Does eBay reimburse buyers when sellers refuse to do so?

I've read about instances here when sellers promise to pay for return shipping when the item is received but then refuses to do so and buyers are just left out in the cold by eBay.

[pjcdn2005]

Ebay-generated? If ebay has to step in and strong-arm a label for the buyer on behalf of an uncooperative  seller, that is just as 'ebay-generated' as a domestic regular return label. If not more so.

Do you seriously think that is what eBay means by  an eBay generated label??  I'm sure that it isn't.  

 Have you ever read about a seller being billed for a buyer generated return label?   I haven't and I I doubt that you have since I don't believe that it is ever done and may not even be legal for them to do....especially since it is not specified in the users agreement.  I can't even imagine the logistics of eBay charging a seller for a buyer generated label when there is no electronic trail for that label within eBay.  

[momcqueen]

I believe eBay is keeping this deliberately ambiguous because that exactly what it will do if pressed but doesn't want to have to do since its time-consuming. It is not at all difficult to price-out the cost of return postage. eBay has both addresses and the weight and dimensions of the parcel. That's the 'electronic trail' you say eBay needs: Estimate postage. Provide that amount to buyer to make purchase for return postage. Add that amount to reluctant seller invoice. Easy.

But, no, I freely admit I've heard nothing about this policy in place as a procedure. I visit only the eBay Canada boards and not dotcom so I'm only likely to hear about an international return from the perspective of a buyer.

[sylviebee]

---

@pjcdn2005 wrote:

Post 12 has the quotes being referred to.  Mj made her comments in the following post.

It sounds like the cs rep is out to lunch, was just trying to sound important or else there is much more to this sellers history that we are aware of.  eBay doesn't close accounts just because a seller doesn't pay for s return label...they give the seller a defect.  If the rep did actually write that to the seller, I have my doubts that they would follow through unless the seller was already on the edge of being suspended.   

---

The rep was talking about sending out a form letter sent to all sellers in this situation.

Trying to figure out what eBay would and wouldn't do based on logic and common sense it pointless.

They continue to break all the rules and do things that defy common sense ...........  such as requiring sellers to pay return shipping for International sales.  We all knew that would be problematic but they did it anyway.

[momcqueen]

Maybe this seller of yours has bullied other buyers with SNAD cases in the past by flat-out refusing to pay Return shipping costs and those buyers were discouraged enough to evaporate when that happened. There must be a reason the seller took a stand that is against what we all know is actual ebay policy to compel (however impossible) the seller to pay return postage chanrges. (And then backed down.) 

I have no problem with ebay insisting that an international seller advance the Return Postage funds to a buyer for the Return label. That seems fair BUT ebay still has to protect that seller from a buyer who instead takes the funds that were supposed to be used to make the return and instead just treats it as a partial refund and keeps it and the offending item. As long as there is a process for that eventual possibility, the money-upfront approach seems fair to me. 

[sylviebee]

---

@mjwl2006 wrote:

Maybe this seller of yours has bullied other buyers with SNAD cases in the past by flat-out refusing to pay Return shipping costs and those buyers were discouraged enough to evaporate when that happened. There must be a reason the seller took a stand that is against what we all know is actual ebay policy to compel (however impossible) the seller to pay return postage chanrges. (And then backed down.) 

---

Maybe that's true.   There are several possibilities.

This particular item had some fraying which would have been forgivable for a piece like this, but someone had taken crazy glue to it in an attempt to conceal the damage.

Imagine buying a high end piece of clothing with crazy glue slathered over a hole as a fix?

I'm constantly wondering why sellers conceal damage from buyers.  However, they must get away with it most of the time or they wouldn't do it so often.  

[momcqueen]

I cannot really fathom it either. When I was amassing my collection on ebay, it would make me insane to buy something that appeared from the photographs to be in excellent condition (therefore matching the description) only to find that the seller would literally bend the package in half to stuff it into an inappropriately-sized box. At one point in time, it seemed as if half my items were destroyed in transit and I don't mean they were hit by the mail truck. They were so badly packed it was mind-boggling. I got one box that had been clearly left in the rain for collection. It was soaked right down to the contents. Did the mailman throw it in a ditch? If that were the case, you'd think the seller might have been interested to start a claim but oh no. I started to feel like sellers were doing this deliberately, as if they regretted the sale afterwards and this was their passive-aggressive attempt to ruin it for their buyer. It doesn't make any sense. These kinds of tactics will always backfire. Or so I should think.

[sylviebee]

mj, it's interesting but my experience is the exact opposite of what you describe in relation to packing.

In fact, I find that my items are ridiculously over-packed more often than not.  

For example, I might get a 200 gram Sterling Silver compact/purse (unbreakable) packed in a box big enough to hold dozens of similar sized pieces.  To top it off the item will have been wrapped in layers upon layers of bubble wrap and topped off with styrofoam peanuts.

For me, that's much more common that poor wrapping is.

Sometimes I'll get an item packed like that with undisclosed damage and the seller will have the gall to blame the Post Office for damage which clearly didn't occur during shipping.

[momcqueen]

Really! Based on my own experience, I thought this was the norm. It never occurred to me that other sellers might be over-packing their contents. Very interesting. 

[thestuffofchris]

I've had both types of experiences.

I have bought a few CDs from Japan over the past couple years (I started to collect certain Japanese CDs) and they have always been well packed. Wrapped multiple times over in bubble wrap, sandwiched between cardboard, and placed in a small box for shipping. To me, it just says that these sellers care a lot about what they are selling and want to ensure whoever purchases it receives it just as it was sent.

On the other hand, I once purchased a wholesale lot of goodies from one seller (it was someone selling from an estate) and the items came loosely packed in a box with a thin layer of packing peanuts at the bottom and a few plastic bags crumpled up on the inside. Thankfully it was nothing fragile or easily damaged.

Most times, though, I find the packaging from sellers to be more than adequate, which I would rather have than poor packaging.

[momcqueen]

One of my most heartbreaking experience was a lot of diecast Cars I bought in excellent condition. Loose. They had been displayed only, never used for play. Excellent condition, rare characters. The seller shipped 75 Cars loose in a cardboard box. When I opened it, my desk was covered in glitter from the paint chips created as they smashed against each other during their 3600 km journey. I almost cried at the destruction. Did I get a partial refund? Yes. But it was small consolation for the fact all this stuff had been damaged whereas previously they had been perfect. I could still sell most of it (or give it to my kids) but the items looked as if they had already seen hard play. All the order needed was just a little TLC before it was shipped. Instead, I had glitter and chipped diecasts. 

On the other hand, it served to reinforce my own obsessive-compulsive tendencies when it comes to content packaging. My stuff has never arrived wrecked. Knock on wood, of course. 

[thestuffofchris]

I'm the same way with packing. Although most of my stuff can (and does) go in a bubble mailer, if anything has to go in a box I make sure to pack it as safely as I possibly can.

I still consider my best buyer experience on eBay to be the one buyer who purchased a DVD box set from me for $125, and has been the only buyer so far who has gone out of their way to message me after the fact to thank me for how well I packaged an item.

Right now I have 2 items (well, bundles) for sale that are already packed up just as safely and well-protected as ever, just waiting on the right buyer to come along. In fact, this little conversation makes me want to go back and double check that I've packed everything to my liking, just to be safe.

[momcqueen]

Just be sure you grab the correct pre-packed box when that times comes! (See my first post on this thread.)

[pjcdn2005]

There is a thread on the US board that is about a domestic snad but someone mentioned Chinese sellers being immune from the return label rules and the eBay rep that had been responding to posts did comment on how they handle return shipping labels with international sales.  He refers particularly to Cinese sellers in the following quote but earlier in the thread mentions that the procedures are the same for all international transactions. 

The post Is from Trinton@ebay.     Message 276

http://community.ebay.com/t5/Shipping-Returns/Well-here-we-go-again-another-SNAD-claim-Is-there-no-e...

.........The way we hold a Chinese seller accountable is the same way we hold any seller accountable when there is not the option to provide a label on the site - the case is placed on a hold for a few days (typically 5) and the seller is sent an email with instructions on how to cover return shipping and a deadline to do so. If they do not do so within that timeframe, the buyer receives a full refund and no return is authorized. I will be sure to touch base with Griff so he is aware of this, as it may be process he has not experienced. I work closely with our claims department on a daily basis and can assure you, these holds do happen and are a normal workflow for returns where a label cannot be provided on the site.

[momcqueen]

Thank you for the clarification.

So the stakes are inherently higher for a seller with an international buying claiming SNAD. Ebay says: give your buyer that return postage money upfront or we will allow them to keep your shoddy item and refund them with your money at the same time. 

Sounds fair.

Except I would hope that ebay also compels the buyer to actually use that postage refund for returning the offending item and not just keep it and the item both.

[momcqueen]

I also especially appreciate the way we can disagree over interpretations of policy without it becoming personal or a saga of one-upmanship. I know you seek the truth above all, as do I. I'm not offended to be corrected. That's a great big 'Job well done!' to you for finding and citing that post. There can be no doubt now how ebay expects its sellers to handle international returns. (Today, at least.) 

[sylviebee]

PJ, that sounds accurate.

It's my experience that sellers aren't aware that they have to pay return shipping for SNAD items, at least as far as international transactions are concerned.

That's surprising because posting here makes it appear as if sellers are well-informed.  Not!  Our small group of regular posters here are among the most informed on eBay and not the norm.

In time, as they become aware I'm hoping that this procedure puts a stop to misrepresenting items, but it could also put a stop to international sales.

It's my experience that a lot of sellers are willing to gamble that buyers will just suck it up or miss the damage until it's too late.  

When I was new to buying I did in fact suck it up most of the time.  Returns and complaints are always stressful so it's probably not the worst selling strategy.

I don't do that anymore.  

When I get an item that has more damage than described I now ask myself whether or not I would have bought the item if I had been informed about the damage prior to the purchase.

When the answer is "no" I initiate a return, but it's almost always met with resistance, but it's better than being stuck with hard to sell items.

[momcqueen]

Returns are so much extra work for negative gain that it seems like an obvious choice to me to just do a better job as a seller in describing the item. It's better to set lower expectations and then exceed them than the other way around.

[momcqueen]

Sylviebee, do you ever cite the damage and then issue a request for a partial refund instead of opening a Return? Or is that not the buyer's solution to offer? Or is it just not worth it.

[momcqueen]

The saddening thing is that with my seller case of SNAD (as explained in Message 2 of this thread) there was a gap between the buyer first messaging me about the problem and me being able to reply -- I was in the car picking up kids from pre-school when her email came in -- and before I could return home and craft an appropriate response to the problem, my buyer had sent me a second message essentially second-guessing herself where she was starting to think the mistake had been hers and she ordered the wrong thing. Which by then I knew she had not, I realized I had sent the wrong one. (That pre-packed box I hadn't checked closely enough.) 

But for a seller keen to exploit the situation, I probably could have done so. Returns are uncomfortable for most buyers to initiate. I felt badly about the extra work my buyer had to do by returning it so I made sure to compensate her as best as I could when I sent the correct thing in its place. Had this item not been valued at $100+, I could have let her just keep it already while I sent her the correct item but I really did need this one back. 

[sylviebee]

---

@mjwl2006 wrote:
Sylviebee, do you ever cite the damage and then issue a request for a partial refund instead of opening a Return? Or is that not the buyer's solution to offer? Or is it just not worth it.

---

Yes, when a partial refund would work I do request that as an alternative.   However, more and more I just want to do the return because repairs are time consuming and I already have more than enough items waiting to be repaired.

I buy to re-sell and listing pieces that aren't in excellent condition takes a lot of extra work and effort:  More pictures, longer description, and all for a lower selling price.  The longer I do this, the more I want only the best of the best pieces.

And yes, returns are stressful and more so because sellers almost always take the stance that the buyer is putting one over on them and that's very uncomfortable.  

That couldn't be further from the truth.  When I receive items which were accurately described I'm delighted and most of the time that's the case.  I buy a lot of truly amazing over the top pieces on eBay etc.

(BTW:  Just cringed at your story about receiving the chipped box of toys.  What a shame!)