eBay dispute resolution employees are not qualified to make calls on IT equipment

[kxeron]

Hello,

I have recently had the displeasure of observing multiple incidents, 2 of which I was personally consulting on.

1. Individual purchases a computer with preloaded software that turns out to be pirated. The software was advertised on the listing and since it was using brand names, it should have been genuine and came with adequate license certificates. eBay rules against the buyer due to "intangible" items rules, rules very much out of date in today's world where a predominantly high amount of products are software or rely on software as a basic function. It's like having a calculator that has no programming, it won't add or subtract even without it, it's just a pile of silicon, fiberglass, metals and plastics — worth only for scrap.

2. Seller sells CPU to a buyer, buyer asks mid-transit if the CPU will work in a specific socket. Different motherboard/CPU combinations have different socket types, neither compatible with each other. Seller speaks in the negative. Buyer purchased it before having all their questions answered and started Not As Described proceedings. Seller presents eBay with technical evidence that the CPU will not work in the buyer's socket. Buyer proceeds to attempt to destroy the CPU by stomping on it, presenting that back to eBay and is awarded a refund. Seller gets CPU back, does basic restoration work (Bent pins back into place) on it and tests it, it was functional.

3. Seller sells a motherboard to a buyer, buyer obtains the motherboard in functional, working and new condition. The buyer proceeds to install it incorrectly, resulting in the motherboard becoming damaged and proceeds to make a "Not As Described" complaint. Seller presented evidence that the motherboard was tested, including photographs of BIOS information screens containing details about the motherboard. eBay doesn't take into account those photos and rules in favour of the buyer since the board "wasn't working", the seller was forced into a refund. Seller gets it back and sees several components had been knocked off of the board due to poor installation methods, tries a counterclaim, ruled against.

4. Seller sells a stick of RAM that was tested and new, Memtest86+ (an industry standard RAM testing program) was run on it to check it for defects. 100% pass on Memtest86+. Seller packages it up in the usual retail type packaging in amongst static-resistant bubble-wrap (pink). Buyer receives and proceeds to install it incorrectly, again damaging the part. Proceedings started as usual that the part was "DOA" and that the seller sold bad RAM to them, of course a refund was ordered by eBay without determining if the buyer installed it correctly. Seller gets the RAM back, tests and Memtest86+ reports errors on a specific memory address. Takes stick out and inspects: A few of the traces were scratched as if by a screwdriver (you don't need any tools to install RAM, it clicks into the socket by plastic tabs). eBay remained their ruling since it couldn't be "proven" that the buyer was the one that damaged it to eBay's satisfaction.

This tells me something, it tells me that eBay's employees are not qualified to make rulings in information technology equipment, or at least policy prohibits them from taking technical evidence into account. There seems to be a very minimal effort involved on their part to actually make qualified determinations if a case has merit or not. Further, their dispute department seems not to have anyone on staff that has a background in determining if an information technology part is defective or not. Often eBay's employees err to the question "Does it work", which given a substantial amount of scenarios in IT, what an untrained person determines as working and what I along with my colleagues as professionals determine as working are two different things or at least "not working" for totally different reasons (Why won't that CPU work in that socket? It won't fit, not that the seller sold a bad part).

In this day and age where technology is becoming more and more important, I would honestly like to see eBay being better qualified because as it stands, they are not. It would be the equivalent to a judge making a decision on a criminal case while that judge having no knowledge of law, or a housing tribunal making a decision without knowledge on how rentals work. I don't think 100% of the resolution department needs to be knowledgeable, just enough for cases specific to IT equipment to be handed to. In this day and age, there needs to be more competence in IT since it is so central to our world today. Whatever happened to "You broke it, you bought it?"

If anyone can defend eBay, I honestly would like to hear it, because I honestly cannot see any such angle.

[mater721]

Much of this may be true but...

"Seller sells a motherboard to a buyer, buyer obtains the motherboard in functional, working and new condition."

"buyer proceeds to install it incorrectly"

"Seller sells a stick of RAM that was tested and new"

"Buyer receives and proceeds to install it incorrectly"

How do you know?

Is there anything more than each side's part of the story?

[Anonymous]

Actually I don't think it is wise to sell the used computers, TV, VCRs, technology, etc., on eBay.  No guarantee that the buyer(s) would be happy with their purchases that way.

Sell the used ones in your local homes or donate them to schools or library.

[kxeron]

---

@mater721 wrote:

Much of this may be true but...

"Seller sells a motherboard to a buyer, buyer obtains the motherboard in functional, working and new condition."

"buyer proceeds to install it incorrectly"

"Seller sells a stick of RAM that was tested and new"

"Buyer receives and proceeds to install it incorrectly"

How do you know?

Is there anything more than each side's part of the story?

---

Both of those cases were the two I was speaking about where I was assisting in the testing (with my qualifications) so they had qualified, expert evidence that the hardware was functional and stable. Essentially I was the QA for them to ensure they weren't selling junk trying to reduce the risk of something coming back against them. Both were being sold because the individuals purchased them, and later determined they didn't need them, but it was outside of the return to the store threshold. Both cases had the original packaging, manuals and such.

The issue is the majority of people do not know how to correctly install computer hardware *safely*; either they don't feel it going in so they use unnecessary tools or extra force to make it go in or they press down too hard on a screwdriver while screwing in a board and it jabs something sensitive (perhaps hurting themselves). Shipping damage causes cracks, bent corners or the like, never the relatively "minor" damage that can total a circuit board such as scratched circuit pathways (traces) while packaging being undamaged.

[maximus7001]

In any market you are going to see dud customers. I am an IT guy as well and by trade since 1984. I have seen it all.

I have refused to deal with some really bad customers over the years for similar reasons. I will highlight a few of the bad ones:

1. Sold a complete xp computer to a customer and delivered it. About 6 months later I get a call that it will not turn on anymore. Turns out that they had been holding the power button to turn it off every night. This eventually wrecked the hard drive. They wanted us to fix it under warranty.

2. About 10 years ago sold a stick of ddr1 laptop memory to a customer. He had no idea how to put it in and proceeded to use a drill to try to get the last screw out??? He ended up drilling a hole through the motherboard. He then wanted to return the memory for a full refund and had already thrown out the package. One of the ram chips on the stick was also missing???

3. Sold a wireless keyboard mouse combo to a really bad customer. This is when they first came out and were $100+. So I am sitting at the workbench talking with a visiting tech from another store and he was telling me about this guy who had brought in a keyboard with a spill the day before and described the guy perfectly. I saw it coming. The next day guess who shows up and tries to claim warranty for this keyboard that "just stopped working" that was really cleaned up by that other shop and still did not work. Ideas anyone?

[afantiques]

Ideas anyone?

Run your own 'Idiot Insurance'

Presumably most sales go pretty much as expected with no problems, so the odd hard case must be a small minority.

Divide total sales by problem sales and that's your risk figure. ($100,000 total, $2,000 go bad, risk is one in 50)

Since there is a 2% chance of any sale being a total loss, add 2% of your average item price to the shipping and handling charge.  This levy on all your customers will cover you for those occasional bad or stupid buyers.

Just think, the time not spent arguing the toss and providing futile 'evidence' would probably cover the cost of the items if costed out as productive time.

There is no point railing against a system that will not change and cannot reasonably be expected to take anything but a very simple approach to  claims. Just  take steps as suggested to prevent the inevitable from impacting too severely on your profits.

[maximus7001]

Forgot to point out in my previous post that these incidents were live and not through ebay. Just goes to show that ebay is not the problem here, there is just a % certainty like afantiques pointed out.

Also forgot to mention that a brick went through the store window the night of the ram stick. So it cost $500 insurance deductible  in the end instead of giving the idiot $50 to go away.

[mater721]

"Whatever happened to "You broke it, you bought it?"

Unfortunately, this is much harder to prove on internet sales.

More obvious in the store when you are holding the broken item. But even then, some people will discretely place the broken item back on the shelf and walk away.

The problem is not limited just to internet sales.

Some items sold over internet are a risk - both to buyer (because they can not handle item before buying) and to seller (as per your original post).

The suggestions by others may be worthwhile - spread the cost of "insurance" around.