eBay

westernstargifts · ‎12-06-2015

Late shipping defects may come back to bite you.

I looked at the feedback of a seller from whom I had recently made a purchase. I was completely satisfied with everything about the transaction. However one buyer left the seller negative feedback because it hadn't arrived yet and was "estimated" to arrive the day before. He even used the word "estimate" but I guess he didn't understand its meaning.

A second buyer left neutral feedback because the seller missed the "estimated" delivery date (yes, he also used the word estimate) by 5 days. He also said that the seller had "buried" in his listing that there was a 5 day handling charge. This was a reasonable handling time because it was a custom made product. The seller states, in his listing, in big bold red letters, that handling time is 5 days. Now he could have made a change after receiving the feedback but I had no trouble seeing the 5 day handling time when I made my purchase.

Yet a third buyer left neutral feedback saying that the seller didn't ship until he opened a case with eBay. I don't have any actual knowledge of that transaction but have to wonder if it was for the same reason as the above. Or he may not have bothered to read the listing to see the handling time.

rose-dee · ‎12-09-2015

@westernstargifts wrote:
And therein lies much of the problem. First of all, we don't get to see what the "estimated" delivery date is in the first place. Secondly, we don't know if it is accurate or if it has been adjusted for the time of year, holidays, etc. eBay won't be held responsible if their estimates are unrealistic...we will.

Yes, and to make matters worse, without sellers' knowledge it seems eBay has been "monkeying" with those delivery estimates in the background. It will now no longer provide sellers who aren't meeting their delivery times with an extension (who knew this was going on in the first place!). See Pierre's thread today: http://community.ebay.ca/t5/Seller-Central/eBay-Raises-Bar-for-Sellers-for-Meeting-Delivery-Estimate...

We all know that many packages are going to arrive after the estimated date, especially at this time of year, and we could very likely get a lot of no's.

In addition I think there will be a lot of pain felt by Canadian sellers too once winter sets in and roads and airports are affected.

Keep in mind that, with small volume sellers, those defects stay with them for a whole year.

As I mentioned above, the entire concept of seller evaluation has been changed. Further, the standards themselves have been changed (tightened). To retain Global TRS after Feb. 20th, a seller can only have a maximum of 0.5% of transactions with defects and a maximum of 5% of transactions with late shipments. There is no mention of a minimum number of transactions being involved before a seller's status is affected (as with the current defect system). So presumably every single defect will be counted.

"We can have our rating trashed in TWO ways, not just one. There is also the defect for issuing full refunds. It would not take long to knock a seller out of TRS. The TRS itself does not concern me except for the fact that it apparently affects our placement in search."

Actually, under the new system, full refunds won't create defects unless they are connected with seller-cancelled transactions (i.e. for out-of-stock/non-fulfillment). However, if a case opened by a buyer is closed without seller resolution (i.e. without a refund), then a defect automatically occurs. And as mentioned, with the Global TRS defect rate now set at a 0.5% maximum, I think immediate refunds -- regardless of the buyer's complaint -- will become the norm.

You might think this would be one good thing to come out of this policy, except that eBay still hasn't properly managed the returns portion of the refund picture. It's still a bit of a mess, and very confusing for all. What I see happening is that sellers will just refund the buyer to avoid the possibility of losing a case, and buyers will have no incentive to return the merchandise. Sellers will lose both the item and the money from the sale rather than risk a defect (unresolved case). This will be obviously much harder on smaller sellers than on major retailers. Who among us wants to attract even one of these defects when the tally is kept over an entire year?

"We will have to wait and see how it all plays out in the long term."

Yes, I just hope we can survive this long enough.

sylviebee · ‎12-09-2015

Rose, part of the new system also includes defects for transactions when items are out of stock.

That's geared towards the Big Retailers.

Many small sellers sell one of kind items and even when they don't, the little guy rarely runs into that kind of problem.

rose-dee · ‎12-09-2015

@sylviebee wrote:

You believe that eBay is out to get small sellers and I think that's bizarre.

No, not at all. I simply believe we're irrelevant and we have to be aware of that fact in order to understand how to adapt to eBay's ever-changing rules. Gnats on the back of an elephant, so to speak. EBay's policies are hard on smaller sellers not because eBay has some intention of destroying us, but because those policies are directed toward making business on this site easier and cheaper for its largest retailers.

This is purely a rational approach. Why would eBay prefer to focus on a few million troublesome little sellers who are forever making stupid errors, using up their CS resources, and making less money in fees for this site, than to deal with a few thousand large, professional retailers who not only make a lot more money for eBay but cause it far less trouble? The money is where the money is.

However, extending handling time is an easy fix and a forgivable lie.

No, it's really neither easy nor will it always be forgivable. Here's the problem, as the OP quoted:
"A second buyer left neutral feedback because the seller missed the "estimated" delivery date (yes, he also used the word estimate) by 5 days. He also said that the seller had "buried" in his listing that there was a 5 day handling charge." [I think the OP meant "5 day handling time].

Buyers may notice those extended handling times before they go to answer the on-time question, and may realize they are being duped in order to pad the delivery estimate, especially if the seller shipped immediately. If their item was tracked, and the seller had an acceptance scan, then the buyer's response to "The Question" is moot, but if there was no tracking, how will a buyer feel to have been manipulated in this way? I'd rather not take that chance.

The bigger issue to me though is that eBay is recommending we mis-state our handling times in order to "beat" the on-time delivery system that they themselves have set up. How ludicrous is that?

We lie to buyers every day when we leave PFB for those who are nothing but a PITA.
It's just business.

I don't know about you, but that's not my approach to good business. In any case, why is it a lie to leave positive FB once a buyer has satisfied his/her part of the transaction (by paying for the goods)? EBay obliged sellers long ago to leave only positive FB because it recognized that a paying customer was always right (and many sellers somehow didn't understand that).

rose-dee · ‎12-09-2015

@sylviebee wrote:
Rose, part of the new system also includes defects for transactions when items are out of stock.

That's geared towards the Big Retailers.
Many small sellers sell one of kind items and even when they don't, the little guy rarely runs into that kind of problem.

Quite true, however the biggest retailers have digital inventory management systems that help to avoid such problems.

Mid-sized professional retailers (who rely on others for their supplies and who have been the crux of this problem) will have their defect rate turn over every 3 months.

So yes and no. That part of the new policy may be directed at mainly the mid-sized retailers who will hopefully learn in the first 6 months to put better inventory control in place. The rest, and the biggest, will simply not care because they are rolling defects over every 90 days as long as they can keep transaction volumes up.

tobyshitzu · ‎12-09-2015

Id think that too if I had items with tracking with an acceptance scan possible. As it is Im looking a tthe possiblity the 40 untracked items I put in the mail box together last sunday could end up something like spilled accross the 401, generating enough "lates" to instantly have a very negative effect through not fault of my own. The new rules have widened the gulf between americans and canadians who can't use tracking

westernstargifts · ‎12-09-2015

@sylviebee wrote:
westerngifts: I'm in Kitchener and I believe you're in Sarnia.

My items all arrive well before the estimated date, and even if your items take a day longer than mine do because you might be a little further from the hub, you'll still have lots of leeway.

Are your items arriving late?

Or, are you anticipating problems that will likely never occur?

I simply can't believe that I'm the only one whose items are arriving on time.

No, I am in Stratford. We do not have a sorting facility here and they have to be sent elsewhere which adds additional time to delivery. In fact I believe it is Kitchener where they are sorted.

I don't know how many packages arrive on time because buyers have never had to let me know that information. They don't always leave feedback on the day it arrives and most of my products are not shipped with tracking.

However I do frequently receive the "item not received" emails and there are times when an entire shipment seems to go astray, as happened to me last year.

I totally agree with rose-dee's comments above. Right now I can control most of the issues with defects but I cannot control delivery time or whether or not the package arrives.

That brings up another scenario. If the package does not arrive the seller will get a defect for issuing a refund. Since the item has been shipped eBay will still be asking the question regarding on time delivery and the seller would receive another defect for "late" delivery. I have no idea if eBay will count 2 defects from one buyer or if they will count it as one. Either way, I have no control over delivery.

And how do you define late? Is that within Canada Post's "estimated" delivery time or in eBay's? These are ESTIMATED delivery times and are not written in stone. Do you actually know how many of your packages arrive "on time"?

westernstargifts · ‎12-09-2015

@rose-dee wrote:
@westernstargifts wrote:
And therein lies much of the problem. First of all, we don't get to see what the "estimated" delivery date is in the first place. Secondly, we don't know if it is accurate or if it has been adjusted for the time of year, holidays, etc. eBay won't be held responsible if their estimates are unrealistic...we will.

Yes, and to make matters worse, without sellers' knowledge it seems eBay has been "monkeying" with those delivery estimates in the background. It will now no longer provide sellers who aren't meeting their delivery times with an extension (who knew this was going on in the first place!). See Pierre's thread today: http://community.ebay.ca/t5/Seller-Central/eBay-Raises-Bar-for-Sellers-for-Meeting-Delivery-Estimate...

We all know that many packages are going to arrive after the estimated date, especially at this time of year, and we could very likely get a lot of no's.

In addition I think there will be a lot of pain felt by Canadian sellers too once winter sets in and roads and airports are affected.

Keep in mind that, with small volume sellers, those defects stay with them for a whole year.

As I mentioned above, the entire concept of seller evaluation has been changed. Further, the standards themselves have been changed (tightened). To retain Global TRS after Feb. 20th, a seller can only have a maximum of 0.5% of transactions with defects and a maximum of 5% of transactions with late shipments. There is no mention of a minimum number of transactions being involved before a seller's status is affected (as with the current defect system). So presumably every single defect will be counted.

"We can have our rating trashed in TWO ways, not just one. There is also the defect for issuing full refunds. It would not take long to knock a seller out of TRS. The TRS itself does not concern me except for the fact that it apparently affects our placement in search."

Actually, under the new system, full refunds won't create defects unless they are connected with seller-cancelled transactions (i.e. for out-of-stock/non-fulfillment). However, if a case opened by a buyer is closed without seller resolution (i.e. without a refund), then a defect automatically occurs. And as mentioned, with the Global TRS defect rate now set at a 0.5% maximum, I think immediate refunds -- regardless of the buyer's complaint -- will become the norm.

You might think this would be one good thing to come out of this policy, except that eBay still hasn't properly managed the returns portion of the refund picture. It's still a bit of a mess, and very confusing for all. What I see happening is that sellers will just refund the buyer to avoid the possibility of losing a case, and buyers will have no incentive to return the merchandise. Sellers will lose both the item and the money from the sale rather than risk a defect (unresolved case). This will be obviously much harder on smaller sellers than on major retailers. Who among us wants to attract even one of these defects when the tally is kept over an entire year?

"We will have to wait and see how it all plays out in the long term."

Yes, I just hope we can survive this long enough.

When I mentioned defects for refunds I was thinking more of the refunds we give for "items not received" and, very occasionally, for an item that just can't be found. Both will be seller initiated refunds. I always refund them before a case is opened or escalated. I get my share of INR's in a year although I have a hard time believing that that many items actually go missing. But it is part of doing business online.

And I did mean "handling time", not "handling charge". Thanks for the correction.

sylviebee · ‎12-09-2015

Suddenly there seems to be a push towards saying the the current system is fair and in the seller's control.

Where did that come from? Posters here actually prefer this old system to the one on the horizon?

I have a number of defects and every one of them is the result of something that was out of my control.

With the new system that will be reset to zero defects as long as the system is retroactive.

Western: Since you are in Stratford it would take one day for your items to arrive at the hub in Kitchener.

Like mine they will arrive at the buyer's home well within the ETD as long as you ship within your handling time.

Worrying over something may never be a problem make no sense unless you have some power to change it.............

and you don't.

For those who don't feel that increasing handling time compromises their integrity, there is always that option.

Odds are that the new system will be a pleasant surprise for those who are spending so much energy anticipating the worst.

pjcdn2005 · ‎12-09-2015

In addition, we would also lose TRS status because of the longer handling time.

We don't need to have 1 day shipping for TRS unless we want to have the TRSplus badge show on our listings on .com.

When I mentioned defects for refunds I was thinking more of the refunds we give for "items not received" and, very occasionally, for an item that just can't be found. Both will be seller initiated refunds.

The first one is not considered a seller cancelled transaction defect so you won't get a defect for giving a refund for an inr. Basically, you get a defect if the item is never shipped and the customer did not request a cancellation.

From the update...

What counts as a seller cancelled transaction?

Any transaction cancelled through eBay or refunded through PayPal because the seller no longer has the item or chooses not to ship the item will count in the defect rate as a seller-cancelled transaction. Transactions that are cancelled because the buyer no longer wants the item are not counted in the defect rate.

pjcdn2005 · ‎12-09-2015

You might think this would be one good thing to come out of this policy, except that eBay still hasn't properly managed the returns portion of the refund picture. It's still a bit of a mess, and very confusing for all. What I see happening is that sellers will just refund the buyer to avoid the possibility of losing a case, and buyers will have no incentive to return the merchandise. Sellers will lose both the item and the money from the sale rather than risk a defect (unresolved case). This will be obviously much harder on smaller sellers than on major retailers. Who among us wants to attract even one of these defects when the tally is kept over an entire year?

Why would you refund before the return? You wouldn't do that now (unless you didn't want the item back) so there is no reason to do that with the new system. Unless you refuse the return and refuse to pay for a return shipping label for a nad item, there is no way that you would get an unresolved case.

pjcdn2005 · ‎12-09-2015

And therein lies much of the problem. First of all, we don't get to see what the "estimated" delivery date is in the first place.

The estimated arrival date is on the order details page.

ricarmic · ‎12-10-2015

Hi PJC!

As a note, for almost everyone other than the USA, on the orders detail page mine shows: "No estimate available"

I list on .COM only and I use only flat rate shipping:
-USA: "standard shipping"
-everyone else: "standard int'l shipping"

It would be interesting to know what date my buyers see when they get "the question"???

The odd Canadian and International does show a date, which is even more confusing as all my lots have the same shipping designations.....

pjcdn2005 · ‎12-10-2015

You're right, there is no eta on the order details page when there is not eta on the listing. That seems to happen more with items listed on .com and it is happening a lot lately. Perhaps I just didn't notice it before.

In October I asked Raphael how that would work and he thought that the question would probably not be asked on feedback when there was no estimated date on the listing. He was going to double check that so I'll try to remember to ask him next week.

ricarmic · ‎12-10-2015

Hi PJC I thought for a moment my mystery of slow shipping defects on the old reporting but not showing on the new reporting might be solved, however both lots that I got slow shipping defects on did show delivery dates..... so they mystery continues as to how I managed to avoid (so far) dings on the new reporting....

sylviebee · ‎12-10-2015

You live in Sheldon Ontario and I live in Kitchener where there's a hub.

It would take a day or so longer for your items because of your location.

I wonder if your ETA is the same as mine?

ricarmic · ‎12-10-2015

Hi Sylvie! Yes mine go from Shedden to London which is only a wayward stop now then off to other larger sorting centres (or maybe everything goes from London to Mississaugua then off to other sorting centres). I still can have 1 day delivery to Montreal even tho I'm in a wee village, but that isn't a very common thing.....usually it takes longer...

rose-dee · ‎12-10-2015

@pjcdn2005 wrote:
You might think this would be one good thing to come out of this policy, except that eBay still hasn't properly managed the returns portion of the refund picture. It's still a bit of a mess, and very confusing for all. What I see happening is that sellers will just refund the buyer to avoid the possibility of losing a case, and buyers will have no incentive to return the merchandise. Sellers will lose both the item and the money from the sale rather than risk a defect (unresolved case). This will be obviously much harder on smaller sellers than on major retailers. Who among us wants to attract even one of these defects when the tally is kept over an entire year?

Why would you refund before the return? You wouldn't do that now (unless you didn't want the item back) so there is no reason to do that with the new system. Unless you refuse the return and refuse to pay for a return shipping label for a nad item, there is no way that you would get an unresolved case.

I was actually thinking of the issues surrounding returns on items sold to the U.S. (or vice versa) and the current impossibility of issuing a cross-border return shipping label. It seems to me this will create some very messy scenarios.

I can imagine buyers getting upset over being asked to fork out the cash for a return to a "foreign" country, without having any absolute assurance of being refunded by the seller for that expense (especially where cross-border tracking services are involved, which are expensive).

The next step, after a buyer is directed by the bots to return for refund, is to escalate -- complaining to eBay that they have no guarantee of being reimbursed for expensive shipping. Who is at fault in that case? I really don't know that this will always play out the way eBay says it should.

sylviebee · ‎12-11-2015

@rose-dee wrote:
I can imagine buyers getting upset over being asked to fork out the cash for a return to a "foreign" country, without having any absolute assurance of being refunded by the seller for that expense (especially where cross-border tracking services are involved, which are expensive).

The next step, after a buyer is directed by the bots to return for refund, is to escalate -- complaining to eBay that they have no guarantee of being reimbursed for expensive shipping. Who is at fault in that case? I really don't know that this will always play out the way eBay says it should.

The best solution is not to allow returns to get sucked into the system if you can prevent it.

Sellers who are accepting the return can send the buyer cash for shipping right away before there's any chance to escalate.

What's the worst that could happen? The buyer might decide not to return the item but that would only mean that a partial refund was issued (or the same thing).

I think it's a really bad idea to allow buyers to get to the point of escalating the case. eBay is sending out courier labels for return shipping. That can get very expensive for sellers especially, but not only, if broker fees are involved.

rose-dee · ‎12-11-2015

@sylviebee wrote:
The best solution is not to allow returns to get sucked into the system if you can prevent it.

Yes, precisely, and that's what I was referring to in my post #21 above. After Feb. 20th, the most expedient (and safest) thing for a seller to do will be to immediately refund upon receiving a complaint from a buyer, to avoid the risk of getting further into the process and receiving an unresolved case (defect) on your record. And I think there will be a lot more refunding going on for that very reason after February 20th. However I personally don't have a lot of faith in eBay's ability to fairly decide seller/buyer disputes in those instances.

Under the new system, an unresolved (lost) case will be worse than now due to the lower ceiling eBay will be allowing for such cases, especially if a seller is on a 12-month cycle.

My main complaint however is that eBay still hasn't properly sorted out the returns portion of the refund process.

For example, if I were an American buyer purchasing a $300 item from a Canadian seller and have an INAD complaint, who should pay for returning the item? Am I going to trust that seller to reimburse me for the ca. $40 it might cost to return the item with tracking? If I'm the Canadian seller, would I send the money in advance, in order to avoid further problems, without any real assurance the item will be returned? So who is responsible in eBay's eyes for the impasse -- buyer or seller?

I'm not sure eBay would always find in the seller's favour in such scenarios should the buyer escalate the matter. The same principle applies to INR complaints -- come February 20th, a seller will just be safer to refund. From the Fall Update:

"Return requests for items not as described -- such as an item that's damaged or defective, has parts missing, or doesn't match the listing -- will not count towards your defect rate when you successfully resolve the issue with your buyer. Returns will only count as a defect when the buyer asks eBay to step in and help and eBay finds the seller responsible."

"Item not received requests will not count toward your defect rate when you successfully resolve the issue with your buyer. They will only count as a defect when the buyer asks eBay to step in and help, and eBay finds the seller responsible."

What it will boil down to for most of us is this: how much trust do you have in eBay's judgment? Better to just refund...