If an item arrives damaged or is truly defective and can be verified that it is, does it really doesn't make sense to waste money to return that item at the sellers expense/higher cost than it was originally shipped as per eBay requirements.
It doesn't.
And many sensible sellers don't require a return, but will instead request a photo of the damaged goods.
This is a longstanding practice in China & Glass, for example.
Often a photo of the box is also included.
And, it's worth noting, that a lot of damage is due to poor packing on the part of the seller.
If the seller and buyer are negotiating outside the resolution process, this is very straightforward.
If the Resolution Center is involved, the seller is still allowed to refund without return.
I believe that the seller, in the course of a dispute negotiation, can ask for photographic proof of the problem.
If none is provided, then the "return for refund" option remains open.
I agree that giving the buyer a choice of cheaper, slower and untracked shipping is a necessity for us sellers of low priced goods.
But the seller still has to make sure his choices cover all potential costs, including returns.
And we're now back to the Cookie Jar.
