Significantly Not As Described return for refund....if buyer pays for return shipping

[namestreetcity]

According to the Paypal process when you file a claim for an item that is significantly not as described, you must return the item at your cost in order for Paypal to issue a refund for the amount you paid, not the return shipping costs. You have 10 days to provide Paypal with a tracking number. Paypal doesn't allow you to post a reply. You send the item back or in 10 days the claim is closed.

Buyers are being forced to pay to received goods the seller didn't described accurately, and in some cases, honestly.

I think that is wrong.

When you can prove that an item is significantly not as described, then Paypal should refund your entire costs of the item including shipping both ways. Sellers can take advantage of Paypal's forcing buyers to pay for return shipping.

If a buyer doesn't like something or changes their mind, and wants to return it, then the return shipping should be paid by the buyer.

[shadowstreaker]

I understand and agree with you.  eBay and Paypal make a lot of money off the percentages of FNV and for Paypal, the fee coupled with the percentage on the total transaction is ridiculous.  They should release the funds right away to the seller and in cases where a claim is decided in the favor of the buyer then they should request that the seller reimburse Paypal for the refund that Paypal issues to the buyer.  If the seller fails to reimburse then they can't sell on eBay anymore.  Now of course, for very high value dollar transactions, a hold/release period isn't unreasonable to prevent fraud or for new sellers without a solid history that demonstrates they are committed to selling on eBay and resolving issues properly. 

I know they feel they need the hold period in case there is a claim so that they can have access to the funds to provide the refund in case it's a BAD and DISHONEST seller that would take their money and bail leaving Paypal to pay the refund - even though they tell everyone that they only refund IF they can still get the money from the seller's account.

Since it's their platform and they run things they SHOULD be responsible for making sure the sellers are reliable and worthy of being allowed to sell on eBay which means that they stand behind all transactions so, for new sellers, there would be a period of holding funds and releases on a schedule until their reputation and commitment is satisfactory and then for GOOD sellers, they would get their payments processed right away without a hold/release period.

Of course, this is just my opinion and eBay/Paypal would never adopt a policy that leaves them exposed to potential losses of their assured profit when they can put the burden on the sellers.

[daria]

If a buyer contacts ebay directly by phone and files a complaint, shipping costs are refunded.

Do not use paypal to file a complaint.  Use EBAY.

On one purchase ebay emailed me a shipping label for free.

Daria

[henry65]

Pay pal let a scam artist burn me for 50$.I sent him a gift card with 50$ he receives it on feb 12 uses it on feb 13 then tells pay pal it was empty.Pay pal is making me give him a full refund what a joke,theif steals my 50$ and pay pal awards him.

[shadowstreaker]

You've posted in the wrong topic area. This topic focuses on SNAD regarding how buyers are forced to pay for return shipping as opposed to the seller. You should see if there is a topic involving fraud by buyers for you to post in or start a new topic concerning your complaint. Frankly, gift cards are a rip-off anyways from the card issuers due to the high fees for inactivity and those charged after so many months for maintenance, etc. You're dealing with items *gift cards) that represents gouging by the card issuers and purchasers misuse and theft in stealing the cards as in your complaint or trying to rip off the card issuer. Just my opinion but I wouldn't deal in selling such items. It's your choice though.

[debradoodles]

I am a seller and just got hit with my first dispute. It's probably a big waste of time to fight it, but my buyer bought a Juicy Couture velor jacket from me. It was used and I stated that. I also included 3 large pictures, up front, close and tag, with the item. I stated I do not pay for shipping if they return it. The buyer sends me an email stating it is not the same color as her "new Juicy Couture velor" pants. She wants a refund both ways for shipping. When I disagree, she opens a dispute and then tells Paypal she offered me half the shipping! NOT. Not until she opened the dispute! I lowered the shipping for this buyer to boot! I'm going to let PayPal resolve it, but I sure don't think someone who wants something NEW should get refunded for buying something used...and it stated used! Grrrrrrr

[shadowstreaker]

I agree wholeheartedly with you.  This appears to be a complete case of buyer remorse and as such, you shouldn't even have to accept a return.  But if you do then at the very least, in such cases, the buyer should be responsible for the return shipping.

I'd forward any emails if there are any that were outside of the eBay/Paypal email system.  I'd also strongly point out the part where the buyer indicates that they were not happy with the color because the jacket didn't match the color of one of her pairs of pants.  In such a case eBay shouldn't even allow a return or a return stocking fee should be applied for the hassle as well as your listing fees, etc.

The buyer shouldn't be able to claim SNAD when it's clearly buyers remorse.  Definitely let us know how it turns out.

[RidersChoice]

I can understand some of the buyers problems but as a seller I look at it from a different prospective. Yea, if you order an orange and get an apple then that is significantly not as described.  If you are buying a used product you should expect a used product. I am in a unique position to speak for the sellers on this problem. I build handmade saddles and ship them worldwide. Buyers can save hundreds to thousands on saddles that I build and sell. Saddles cost anywhere from 25.00-300.00 to ship.  Handmade products by nature are generally one of a kind and vary from build to  build. Every person has their own idea of quality for the price. And we all know that some folks wouldn't be happy if you hung them with a new rope.  I have had customers take my product and pull it apart, breaking parts of it, and them claim that because it didn't seem to be exactly what they ordered (when in fact it was exactly what they paid for) they claim that it is Significantly Not as Described. Then according to this thread I should pay return shipping for the saddle that now has to be fixed and also pay to repair the item they destroyed.  Who stands up for sellers like me who make great products at low prices and then once in a while gets a customer who is a "nice un".  I think we need something like Angies list for buyers. I am sure if they do it to one they will do it to others.

[shadowstreaker]

Actually, if you read through mine and a few others posts, you will see that we support your position in addition to our position of buyers.  If a seller accurately describes what he is selling then a buyer that bids and wins it shouldn't have a reason to return if UNLESS, it involves a SNAD.  Again, we have stated that some buyers are, just like some sellers, liars and scammers.  These problem people are the ones that we're concerned with - not the good sellers that occasionally have a issue of SNAD.  Usually a good seller and buyer will communicate and resolve the issue.  

Our position, is in true SNAD issues, that the seller should be responsible for the return shipping costs, not the buyer.  Now in one post I pointed out to a seller that the delivery carrier (UPS, USPS, etc) can cause some damage to an item during transit that can cause a new item to look used by the time it gets in the buyers hands.

But typically, the SNAD items that honest buyers get and complain about from shady or dishonest buyers result in a loss to the buyer, of at a minimum, the return shipping costs and wasted time whereas the seller gets the item back, gets reimbursed his eBay/Paypal fees and isn't out any money.  Definitely not proper or fair.

So tell me, what would you, as an honest seller, do if you truly had an honest instance of an SNAD, where you somehow overlooked something significant or accidentally failed to accurately describe the item that you sent.  Do you think a seller in such a case is responsible for the return shipping costs or should the buyer be responsible?

[davinab2008]

I would say that most returns are legitimate but I would also step out and say that some people may buy an item and then when the other half finds out or they just decide it wasn't what they wanted that they demand their money back and want return shipping paid for.  I have seen it done.  I don't sell or buy much on eBay but I would be mad cuz there are actually some honest people out there that do list the stuff accurately and get the shaft because some one changed their mind.  Now if it is legit..then the seller should pay return shipping.  People just need to be honest

[suzy551]

I could not agree more, it is truly a shame that there is so much dishonesty in the world. I have to admit I have been shammed quite a few times, I try my darnedest to find the good in people and I will continue to do so so I know it will more than likely be taken again.

Where I find fault is that Ebay requires you to ship the merchandise back before they will do anything to right the situation.

With the fake Chinese rings I bought it would cost me more to ship them back than I paid for the darn things. So any way you figure it I am going to get taken advantage of. I have lost approximately $56.00  and I am really upset. Unfortunately I purchase the rings from 4 different sellers so my cost to ship the rings back would most likely cost more than that.

These rings were advertised as 14 Kt white or yellow gold.  Some of the adds also said solid 14 Kt gold. I could get better looking rings at the dollar store, they certainly are not gold. I realize that I should not have expected to get real gold at those prices but I thought perhaps they were samples that were being sold at really low prices.  I purchased some Croc shoes at really low prices that were part of a tractor trailer upset and they were terrific.

The Chinese sellers had feedback that indicated that people were pleased with their purchases and I have no idea how they accomplished that.