If You Were in Charge, What Would You Change?

[ericj@paypal.com]

Hi All,

Remember all the times you said, “If I was in charge.”

In an effort to get some additional feedback and ideas, Amanda and I are planning on occasionally putting questions and scenarios to you the account holder. The idea is to have you the customer make the policy. You call the shots!

Tell us what you would do and how you would implement, communicate, and enforce it through policy.

Having said that, I want to put out this little disclaimer: Ideas and suggestions must be within reason keeping in mind community safety, consistency and financial responsibility to the company. We are doing this in an effort to develop a closer relationship with posters and hopefully uncover some ideas that may improve our service. Negative exchanges, attacks, intense and taunting sarcasm will not be allowed or tolerated.

We are reaching out to you in order to improve relationships, foster mutual understanding and most of all find possible improvements that are realistic. I hope you all participate, but do so in a manner that ensures this idea will be a success for everyone involved.

We will not be endorsing or discouraging any particular ideas but we may offer opinions or ask questions from time to time.

We are very excited about holding forums such as this as we realize what a valuable asset our community can be. We look forward to hearing your thought and ideas!

Thanks,
Amanda and Eric

Scenario 1

One of the biggest complaints we hear from both buyers and sellers is about the dispute process. If you were in charge of creating and moderating this process, what would you do? Remember the context of consistency, safety, and financial responsibility!

Nothing like starting small is there? We’ll leave this here for you to get started. Remember, keep it clean and civil. We’ll be back to discuss your ideas.

[amanda@paypal.com]

Hi benne0070_1,

Thanks! It's exactly the kind of input we're looking for.

You said "I would eliminate having the buyer having to return the item(s) at their expense and provide tracking numbers when it has been the sellers fault for the dispute."

If you had a buyer say that they received an item that was not to their satisfaction, how would go about determining that the seller should be required to refund?

Thanks again!
Amanda

[ericj@paypal.com]

Hi All,

Quick note, please remember this thread is about the dispute process. The idea is to give feedback and suggestions towards that process. Other topics should be discussed on separate threads. Please be aware that off topic posts will be removed.

Thanks,
Eric

[nicki9912]

I would also like to add a little bit to Benne's post # 3

We had a buyer on the boards last night, telling us that he was involved in a Paypal dispute. After he filed his dispute, the seller sent along the item.

His package arrived with a box of Kleenex inside !

I feel seller sent this along in order to provide his own tracking number that PP requests

We provided a phone number for this buyer to call paypal with..

Paypal responded with... They would like to see a Police Report.
Well that costs an additional $30.00 and what on earth can the Police tell ?

I feel that this poor buyer was robbed by both his seller, and Paypal

The whole dispute area really needs looking at, and I am happy that you, Eric are looking at it

[reuberj2005]

Not to mention items that sold for so much less that the shipping, it's not even worth sending back.

There are sellers that have optional "insurance" on their CD's/DVD's. When the insurnace isn't paid, they ship in a plain envelope in a paper sleeve. Of course this is a guaranteed way for a CD/DVD to get ruined if not broken.

If you pay the insurance, at least you get it in a bubble packed jewel case. Maybe the jewel case doesn't survive, but the disc will.

You would have to send back broken peices or a non working item with tracking to get a refund not including shipping.

You read about this all the time here in the forums.

. Jim

[amanda@paypal.com]

Hi All,

So what I'm seeing so far is pretty much that buyers should not be required to return items if they are not satisfied.

If you were the seller, would you be willing to refund if the item was not returned to you?

As the payment processor, how would you determine that a seller should be compelled to refund the buyer?

Great Input! Please keep it up.
Amanda

[joybell3]

If buyers relied more on feedback ratings and less on Paypal as a security crutch, there would be less NAD items. I think ebay has quit pushing the importance of feedback in order to hype-up PayPal as the ultimate in protection. It's up to ebay to educate new buyers and it is in PayPal's interest to do so as well.

[ericj@paypal.com]

Hi Benne,

OK, good suggestion but how do you fix it. Give me your dispute process on NAD when it comes to returning the item. Is it the seller's responsibility to cover return shipping always or only scenario based, and if so what would be your criteria for deciding who cover's the shipping?

Thanks,
Eric

[ericj@paypal.com]

Hi Benne,

So essentially situation by situation decide who is responsible for the shipping charges. Got it! We will make sure to pass on your suggestion!

Thanks,
Eric

[reuberj2005]

Or the lands of bargain;-)

. Jim

[nicki9912]

Hi Amanda, and Eric,

In response to amanda's last question...

What if you made it mandatory that a buyer has to send in a photo of the damages/broken/incorrectly described item and then Paypal decides?

I realize this would take extra work on your end, but wouldnt it put an end once and for all to these problems?

[old.crows.nest]

Hi,

Regarding the dispute process. And I believe this is germane to the topic at hand.

If I was in charge I wouldn't look for ways to put the Seller at fault so that the Buyer could win the dispute.

I've just started selling and I can tell you I'm scared to death of something called PayPal's Seller Protection. It seems, from what I have read (over and over again) if a Seller doesn't live up to any part of the rules PayPal Reps automatically rule against them regardless of the issue at hand.

Frankly, being Canadian means I'll probably NEVER win a dispute should I ever, as a Seller, be involved in one because it's highly unlikely I won't get at least one thing wrong!

Most significant to this is using Canada Post means to track a parcel to International locations I would have to ship ground and shipping ground means unreasonable delivery schedules which simply stated, INVITES disputes.

If I were in charge I would look at each case on the merits of the case for a fair settlement. Sorry if this isn't an acceptable response but I hope it makes sense anyway?

[heidilynn0_3]

Hi Eric and Amanda .. i confess to not having given this a great deal of thought lol but can't help but wonder how an automated system, as large as PP , can deal with a complaint process on a case by case basis . Perhaps , an alternative could be to require return and tracking over XXX sale price. IE where the buyer has a significant investment . Just a thought . .
.

[joybell3]

How about only sellers with great feedback scores be allowed to offer PayPal as a payment method? There would be fewer NAD complaints.

[aquafina_green]

I would make it mandatory for the seller to include a return service label (with a tracking barcode) for each sale. This would be at the seller's expense only. If a seller knew s/he had to pay for each return, s/he would think twice about sending junk or improperly packing items. Chances are, returns would become less frequent. Of course, there is the possibility of the buyer abusing the system and returning too often, but if the item is well-packaged and cared for by the seller (i.e. NO JUNK), it's less likely to happen.

[old.crows.nest]

aquafina_green,

??? Not possible to do and if it were, it would be cost prohibitive for every Seller to be forced to do it.

An interesting fact. Canada Post offers limited tracking options and none of them are economical and /or practical, totally unlike the US Postal System which has various options, some under $1 that can be monitored online.

PayPal Seller Protection is set up based on the privileges offered by the USPS. Canadian Sellers can't even ship a $100+ item International using CP and have insurance whereas a US Seller can ship up to $675 (if I remember correctly.)

[aquafina_green]

Ok, it was just a thought. I get the impression that buyers are tired of receiving "junk" and having to foot a higher bill to return it, so might decide it's cheaper to keep it. I was thinking in terms of basic packages, not necessarily letterpost or small international packets which have no tracking at all. I did receive a return label from a DVD company from the US once (as you mention, USPS tracking system is superior to CP) and I really appreciated the gesture. It appears to be a professional way to handle returns, especially for a company/business. Rather than mandatory, a return shipping label could still be promoted and encouraged.

For example, if CP would offer a reasonable discount on these labels, that might make a difference, but apparently, a company requires 10,000 returns annually to claim a "bulk" discount. What?!? Sales perhaps, but 10,000 returns? Let's hope not here on e-bay! 😛

[old.crows.nest]

Hi,

If Amanda and Eric are still watching?

I would also like to add a couple of additional points besides the one I already mentioned regarding the inappropriate /misuse of the SPP as the "consistency" being applied to settle ALL disputes.

For "Item Not Received" claims I would also like to make sure that if a Seller provides ("privately" to a PayPal Rep) Tracking information as proof that they have fulfilled the SPP that the Buyer be given this information. For none other then they will then be able to initiate an investigation into the missing item they are not being allowed to receive compensation for. Doing so could also likely convince at least some Buyers to not file a CC chargeback. The Buyer has a right to this information in the regular dispute process so why withhold it and tell the Buyer that PayPal Policy prohibits telling them why their claim was denied. In fact the Buyer SHOULD always be told why their dispute was denied! That would go a very long way to building trust!

Second additional suggestion is that IF a Seller appeals a judgment against them the Buyer MUST be notified just as if it were a continuation of the initial dispute. If the Seller then WINS the Buyer SHOULD be given ample notice to insure that they have the Funds available for the reversal to occur. Springing this kind of thing on people (Funds Reversals without notification) is NOT a trust building activity!

[old.crows.nest]

I am just starting to Sell and Insurance is NOT an option. When available, it is something I see as MY responsibility as a Seller! Frankly, the Buyer has NOT-A-THING to loose, especially if they paid using a CC through PayPal! Insurance is for me NOT the Buyer so why would I charge them?

[old.crows.nest]

Something else just occurred to me.

I'm not sure that I remember that the BPP covers this?

It does state though that a Buyer cannot "double-dip" by making a claim against their CC and also with PayPal.

But what about Insurance? I have seen in Feedback comments where a Buyer received a refund and Insurance monies too.

I believe that if PayPal rules in favour of a Buyer but that Buyer is somehow also able to apply for and win an Insurance claim, and the Seller can prove this, then it should be treated the same way. The Refund should be reversed.

???