Well, I got my first defect. I supplied five pictures of a vintage brooch

[rabbitmarilyn]

I was quite proud of myself for clearly showing the see-through nature of the amber glass stone in all of the pictures. The buyer, however, said she expected the glass to be 'engraved' and look like the doily. I guess it's back to plain white backgrounds.

I responded promptly to her emails (she sent three consecutive ones in the wee hours and in the last one stated she couldn't be bothered to send it back but she would leave me good feedback anyway since that's "all you sellers care about anyway").

I told her I was sorry she was disappointed with her purchase and said she could return it. I like to go the extra mile so I told her I would pay the cost of the postage both ways. I told her that of course I wanted good feedback like any seller, but I was prepared to earn it by being accountable.

She did not respond to my offer made yesterday morning but instead rewarded me with a neutral this afternoon. Do I have grounds for claiming feedback extortion? Some of her past dealings and comments are decidedly flakey. Maybe I've been hanging around on the U.S. Community site too much (they are decidedly more macho than this board for the most part) but her complaint is suspect. I suppose she hoped I'd tell her to keep it free. What do you guys think? Should I do something or just let it go?

[sylviebee]

---

@rabbitmarilyn wrote:

 What do you guys think? Should I do something or just let it go?

---

 I don't see a case for FB extortion.

What you do depends entirely on how much you care about the NFB and the associated defect.

Your buyer has a point and the photo was (unintentionally) misleading.

Personally, I would not have wanted the item back because this is not an easy sale and the item is not worth the cost of return shipping.

I would have offered a 50% partial refund to start with.

Now, if you want the buyer to revise FB you'll probably have to offer a full refund.

Or you could just let it go.

[mr.elmwood]

"intricate scroll work"

That whole sentence is hard to read. The way I read it the first three times was the glass had intricate scroll work. Buyer expected that. Pictures sure make it look like that as well.

Sending several emails is not a good idea. Some buyers find that harassing.

You appear to be new at selling. There is a learning curve. It is an endless curve.

I would let it go.

[rabbitmarilyn · Accepted solution]

No, no. SHE sent the three emails. Thanks to you and to SylvieBee for responding. I looked over her past transactions again and realize she has all but admitted she has poor eyesight to a couple of sellers.

I realize now that she (or he) is a likely a senior citizen and maybe a little isolated which would explain the 'flakiness' in some of the responses to sellers visible.

So I'll take SylvieBee's advice and see if reimbursing her the whole amount works (first) and follow up with a request to remove/change feedback works. If it doesn't work, then I learned something from it at least.

Thanks for the input. It's highly useful for new sellers to be able to come here and ask things and I hope this is one aspect of eBay that never changes.

[ricarmic]

My suggestion is to leave the amount of the refund up to her, no sense in you deciding to give it all back, she might be happy with a partial refund and that way she is in "control" of the resolution, which generally helps IMO, and may influence her to change the feedback.

As a note, when I've had similar situations, I've used versions of these "form letters" they have sometimes helped.... feel free to use whatever works for you... your situation is different as you've already been conversing....

http://community.ebay.ca/t5/Seller-Central/Neutral-Negative-ratings-or-threats-thereof-the-form-lett...

[mr.elmwood]

You already have the defect, why would you refund? The damage is done, keep the money.

[sylviebee]

---

@mr.elmwood wrote:

You already have the defect, why would you refund? The damage is done, keep the money.

---

If the seller offers to refund and sends a request to revise FB, and the buyer revises to PFB and gives the seller 5 stars, wouldn't the defect be removed as well?

[sylviebee]

To answer my own question I found the following:

http://www.ecommercebytes.com/C/blog/blog.pl?/comments/2014/12/1417484823.html/2/20

It looks as if the defect would stay in place even if the buyer revises NFB to PFB.

but perhaps that's changed since December?

In any case, that may alter the way one does things........... rabbit.

Something to consider:  Is it worth the money to have the Neutral FB disappear since you'll likely still be let with a defect...

or has that been changed (fixed)  during the past few months?

[mr.elmwood]

---

@sylviebee wrote:

---

@mr.elmwood wrote:

You already have the defect, why would you refund? The damage is done, keep the money.

---

If the seller offers to refund and sends a request to revise FB, and the buyer revises to PFB and gives the seller 5 stars, wouldn't the defect be removed as well?

---

And that is EXACTLY why feedback has to go away, because it is bought and sold. FB is meaningless when sellers can "buy" a revision.

[pjcdn2005]

but perhaps that's changed since December?

Yes, that's changed. The defect does not stay if the buyer revises the feedback and/or low DSR's.

But it isn't allowed to suggest a refund for a revision. The refund would have to be done first and then the OP would have to 'ask' for the revision with no guarantees that it would be done.

[rose-dee]

I took a look at the amber brooch (I presume this is the item involved?), and I have to say that it is understandable that someone could misconstrue the photos.  Taken together with the mention of "intricate scrollwork" in your description, a buyer might easily assume the crochet "scrollwork" they were seeing was somehow etched into the piece (especially if it's someone with rather poor eyesight).  

This is a situation where there is no perfect answer.  As I see it you have two choices: 

a)  Do nothing, let the neutral FB stand, have no further communication with the buyer, and learn from this -- you're right that a plain white background would have been much better in this instance.  My philosophy of eBay photos is that if there's anything that can be misunderstood or misinterpreted, it will be. 

One thing you can do if you wish (and this is entirely up to you), is add a comment to her neutral FB saying something along the lines of "Offered buyer full refund, but no response".  This will at least signal to other buyers who see that neutral that you didn't just sit on your hands when a buyer was dissatisfied, but actually tried to remedy the situation.  It won't remove the defect, but it might lessen some of the effect of the neutral FB comment. 

b)  Give a refund in the hope you can persuade the buyer to change her FB to positive.  Whatever you do though, don't offer a full refund -- you'll get an automatic defect for that from eBay, so that even if the buyer revises her FB, you'll still end up with a defect for this transaction.  

Now I think 'ricarmic's' advice about negotiating a partial refund with a buyer may work better in the world of stamps where buyers are probably a fairly reasonable bunch overall.  However, given your comments about your buyer's "flakey" emails, you may instead simply want to send one message to her, telling her you've considered her comments, apologize for the misunderstanding, and will be sending her a (50%, 30%, 25%???) refund of her purchase price (do that immediately).  When you send the money, follow up with a note that you'd be grateful if she could consider revising her FB to positive, even to something generic such as "transaction concluded satisfactorily".  You will have to decide what percentage refund you think will be enough to encourage her to revise her FB.  Keep in mind that she may not even know how to revise her FB, or may just not bother, so it's a risk.  

My inclination, in a situation like this, would be to move on and learn from this unfortunate mistake.  Why lose money over a transaction for which you already have a defect, in order to possibly encourage a buyer to change her FB?  The chances of her changing the FB may be good or poor, depending on her attitude and her eBay experience.  Judging from her comment about sellers only caring about FB, I'd say she's unlikely to do you any more favours, regardless.  

BTW, I wouldn't consider this a FB extortion situation, and I don't think eBay would remove the neutral for that reason.  

[rose-dee]

---

@mr.elmwood wrote:

And that is EXACTLY why feedback has to go away, because it is bought and sold. FB is meaningless when sellers can "buy" a revision.

---

Except that a buyer is under no obligation at all to actually revise, even if he/she is repaid in full.  I'm sure there are many cases of a buyer making an unsubstantiated or unreasonable claim against a seller, leaving neutral or negative FB, being given a full or partial refund, and still not revising their FB. 

A full refund by a seller results in a defect anyway.  So that's a pretty pointless risk and trade-off in the hope of getting a FB revision in return.  

I'd say the FB system is far more risky and significant for sellers than buyers, which in my opinion is the main problem with FB -- not that it's entirely meaningless, but that it has a completely lopsided value, depending on whether you're a buyer or a seller. 

[momcqueen]

Uh.... 

I don't consider myself to be any kind of expert on amber but no one in the market for it would or could ever expect it to look like a doily. Amber-coloured glass would be just that. Glass. Actual amber is petrified resin with or without bugs and or hunks of fern. Not doilies or intricate crochet work. I think your buyer is mistaken, period. Obviously the scrollwork will be in the clasp holding it. Call ebay and say she was trying to extort a refund and keep the item. It's worth a try. Your offer to fund return shipping was more than generous. 

[momcqueen · Accepted solution]

(Oh, and save your money. Refunding her won't remove the neutral and only reinforce her behaviour.)

Expected amber glass to be crocheted! Really. It's not as if the doily was cropped away from the photos. It is clearly visible. 

[rabbitmarilyn]

Thanks for all your responses and MJW, to you in particular for your refreshing and practical appraisal of the situation. If it walks like a duck, eh?

I did not refund. I ended by both reporting the buyer (you're right; it doesn't hurt to try) and leaving feedback on his(her) comment. I haven't been around long enough to worry about TRS, so it's not that big of a deal. In a high fraud category like vintage/antique jewelry I'm discovering, oddly enough, that the best defence is to sell high. I never have any problems until I try selling inexpensive stuff and a different clientele emerges from the shadows.

I like to turn negatives into positives when I can so I'm happy enough at this point to let the neutral stand. If nothing else, it will be a bit of a deterrent to scam artists lol. I've thought of posting on my selling page that I'm an ex-crime reporter but I can think of crooks who would find that a challenge. Probably a worse idea than my rejected plan of mentioning the rabbit in Monty Python's The Holy Grail somewhere in my listing.

But a firm response to blow a neutral out of the water works, too. Thanks to all of you.

[ricarmic]

Hi Rabbit! It has been my experience that if the exact same thing sells to one person for 99c and another for $9.00 normally you need to be worried about the one that got it for 99c......in terms of potential problems.....

[rabbitmarilyn]

Yeah. You guys are right. Some sales are not worth having.