pierrelebel
this has nothing to do with reserve. I bought a product as a "buy it now" not an auction. [I agree auctions need to be able to have reserves] but if you buy something, then the seller needs to fulfil that part of the "contract"
OR
Ebay has to post that there IS NO CONTRACT - AND the SELLER has the right to back out of any agreement as they see fit - as the posted noted in Ebay "France"
If this was the case, to be FAIR, then BOTH SELLER AND BUYER would need to have that same right, to be able to pull out of any "agreement" they might have had.. then the whole system is based on "honour" -- which is BULL **bleep** today.
A "Legal Contract" on the other hand is a LEGAL CONTRACT, it must have certain elements; the parties, their position in the contract, dates, product or service, action, and an end date (there is no such thing as a perpetual contract in law) Contracts can even be verbal but verbal contracts are harder to enforce. Both parties are then tied to an action and are expected to fulfill their end of the obligation, be that payment or fulfilment. When one side does not fulfil their end of the agreement, this is known as breach of contract.
Ebay needs to make a CHOICE of SERVICE - they CANNOT say, "you are entering into a LEGAL BINDING CONTRACT" when in fact we found out you are NOT.
If they want to keep their current direction, then they need to change the language on their terms and conditions stating - as we said, "Ebay is an "HONOR BASED SYSTEM - this is NOT a LEGAL or BINDING CONTRACT and EITHER BUYER or SELLER may back out of the agreement as they feel fit"
If they want to keep things LEGAL -- then the way they need to do it is keep purchase money in escrow until both buyer and seller are happy with the results of said CONTRACT - THEN release funds to the seller.. If there is a PROBLEM, like the seller does not SEND the item or its the wrong item or not like described etc, that money cannot simply be released. it has to be CONCLUDED by both buyer and seller...
Sellers should also have to maintain insurance, based on a percentage of the value of the sale if they cannot (or will not) fulfill their end
of the agreement.
in my case, I simply bought a similar item from another seller, but Ebay sells high end stuff too, like real estate. With real estate, each property is unique in its own way.
what if it was a historic artifact that could not be replaced?
what if the buyer was buying something that they knew they could -resell and make more money on and the original seller renegade? should that seller not be responsible for damages as well?
the problem here is the process.
Ebay has to make a choice of they type of service they want to promote. they cannot have it both ways.
