@pjcdn2005 wrote:
First, the seller got a late shipment ding, there is no defect or ding or black mark for an inr so I don't know why you keep mentioning 2 defects/ 2 black marks etc. Second, you are missing the point I was making. I am not saying that it would be right for a seller to pretend to send an item to avoid an oos defect and I wasn't saying that this seller was trying to avoid a defect. I was giving an example of how a dishonest seller could avoid an oos defect and they could also avoid a late shipment ding if ebay did what you suggested and didn't give late shipments to a seller that refunded for a missing item. It would be a loophole.
Also...in most cases, I really don't see this as being a big problem...of course it would be annoying to the seller who received the late shipment in this situation but I think that any late shipment is annoying since for the most part, delivery isn't in our control once we mail the item.
Regardless of whether you think something is fair or not, the rules regarding late shipments are fairly clear so ebay doesn't have to explain how or if this particular situation is 'fair' I really think that in this case, this is much ado about nothing. It isn't something that happens often so ebay isn't going to make a special rule about it just for Canadians because tracking is more expensive. To be honest, I haven't seen proof that the late shipment dings have affected Canadian sellers as much as you seem to suggest they do.
I think you're misunderstanding the OP's original post. He got 2 "late delivery" marks (indeed, not defects) because he had refunded 2 transactions.
As for the example you gave of the seller attempting to bypass defects and not getting a late delivery mark, it's hardly worth splitting hairs over. The vast majority of sellers are not going to be fraudsters and scammers on eBay these days; there are far too many other buyer protections in place to make that a successful strategy anymore. It would be a small concession -- especially to Canadian sellers -- for eBay to give the majority, who are honest sellers, a break from double jeopardy when they do the right thing for buyers.
Lastly, although you may be right that this is a minor problem for many sellers, for smaller sellers (especially Canadians) who are at the whim of Canada Post, every demerit from eBay is significant, especially when it isn't fairly earned. An undeserved demerit is one that shouldn't have been given out in the first place. As I said earlier, most of these parcels probably do eventually show up at the buyer's door, so a seller in this position has had enough of a loss without receiving a back-handed, after-the-fact slap thanks to eBay's permitting the buyer an "opinion" on late delivery. I still maintain that late delivery assumes the buyer received the parcel and that it should accordingly be superseded by a resolved INR refund.
All of which doesn't mean I think eBay will ever budge on this issue.
And as hopeless as it may seem, I do think we have a right to ask how eBay justifies this. We are, after all their paying customers. I don't think any of us can know the extent or real impact, so looking for "proof" of that effect is pointless. One thing is certain though -- as non-tracked shipping gets more expensive, buyers are quite rightly going to expect prompt service for their money, so refunds for claims of non-delivery are only going to increase, especially if Canada Post doesn't step up its game (there were a lot of complaints this January/February about extremely slow or delayed deliveries of non-tracked items). So any of us who are small enough to care about each late delivery mark (and unable to afford to ship mostly with tracking) should be concerned.
w~~_7.JPG "pjcdn2005"){kind=avatar}
