Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

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


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

I almost always do everything based on principal unless the cost to fight it is way too high. 

Which means if I believe I'm correct (after first considering if I'm wrong or made a mistake) and it looks like the other party is being off-base or trying to take advantage then I don't give in. 


Now this means that I could lose but I take that into consideration and all that it could entail, such as negative feedback, fee reversal, etc.  This usually occurs with buyers/sellers that are not honest and trying to take or get an advantage.  These are the dishonest people that are always a threat.  The good ones aren't a problem and they are usually willing to work things out.


In this case, I'd point out to the buyer that prices on an item don't prove that the items aren't vintage.  Afterall, not all stores or vendors sell the same items for what they may have seen in a particular seller's catalog.  That's why people shop around.  You can see a wide range of prices for an item and as such doesn't mean the items aren't vintage - merely that the source for these priced them for what they could after their purchase based on what their bulk/volume buying power was assuming it was from an individual who wouldn't be able to get the price break deals that a bigger retailer would get.


I'd then tell the seller that if he or she can prove, apart from the pricing argument, that the items aren't vintage that you'd accept a return and even pay for the return shipping but that price tag amounts aren't acceptable proof since there isn't any set selling price for anything applied to every seller.


Of course, it's likely you're dealing with a dishonest buyer here and a negative feedback could occur but I've found that most buyers that look at feedback take into account that some negatives are from such dishonest people and as long as you respond back and make your case then good buyers will still order from you.


Hope this opinion helps.


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

Further note:  I strongly disapprove of eBay allowing such a concept of PRIVATE feedback.  That's just ridiculous, there shouldn't be any private feedback - people need to know what goes on with every transaction a person is involved in so they can avoid BAD situations that are able to be hidden by this foolish tactic.

New Community Member

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


Yes it's true sellers should be very careful when describing items and only ship out things as described. But how about when buyers try to force the seller to accept a return by claiming not as described when its just buyer's remorse?


Case in point; I sold a wallet described as new in the box recently. It WAS new in the box.

At the time I had 100% feedback with glowing remarks regarding the condition of the items I had sold, some new, some used, some considerably older. I'm sensitive to this because as a buyer I have been taken by a few sellers who did not divulge the flaws in their item's one reumbursed me then either, despite my claims through PayPal.


Anyhow, I have a no return policy which is clearly stated in the auction. I take good clear photos of the item and fully inspect and descibe it. I request that ALL questions are asked prior to bidding.  Buyer asked none.


I carefully packed the wallet in the box and shipped it out. It was in new, perfect condition when it went out.

The buyer contacted me when she received the item and claimed it was crushed, damaged, sticky stuff all over it and it was scratched, NOT NEW, etc, you get the point.  Total drama. I asked myself how that could have happened via shipping as it was personally inspected and packed . It was immaculate. It was in a waterproof envelope wrapped in many layers of protective tissue. I knew this couldn't happen on it's own. I mean sticky stuff all over it? come on.  This stunk of buyers remorse.


I reminded her of the no return policy, restated that the wallet was in new condition when sent and offered to replace the outer (gift) box, with no response from the buyer. Instead, she opened a claim with Ebay. I responded to the Ebay inquery and told them I had sent a new wallet as described to her and don't know how anything like what she's claming could happen.


Their latest action is to have her send me back the wallet for a refund. They never asked me for proof or demonstrated that she had offered proof of her claim. I have thirteen years of 100% postitive activity with Ebay over 1,400 transactions, she has a year and 43 transactions. I have sold many other things of higher value with glowing reviews. What incentive do I have to lie? None. It doesn't make sense. I could sell it with flaws if it had any.. I would list them and get on with it. so...


I ask you, how is this policy fair? I sent her a perfect wallet. She decided for whatever reason she didn't want it so she gets to force me to refund her despite the no return no refund policy clearly stated in my auction by simply lying about the condition in which it was received.


In addition, I am concerned that with such an unscrupulous buyer,  it is possible that she may damage the wallet before she sends it back just to justify her claim. Then I will be out the money AND the wallet to sell to someone else who would be very happy with it.


Anyone care to reflect on this or offer some advice?






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

Unfortunately, this is a prime example of the issue of whether we're dealing with good honest people or dishonest ones.  This is true in all areas of our lives. 


It's a possibility that the item received may have been damaged in transit. It does happen with all the various shippers.  Not saying this is the case but it is possible that other items in transit got smashed, leaked and wound up damaging the item you shipped. My brothers worked for UPS and they both witnessed lots of such damage when conveyor belts, etc, jam and packages fall off onto other packages.  This and other mishandling accidents occur all the time.


You should have asked the seller to file a claim with the carrier since the damage as described would indicate it was damaged during shipping.  The carrier wouldn't have accepted the item for shipping if not properly packaged or if it already appeared to be damaged on the outside.  There's no way it should have gotten sticky, etc, unless you shipped it that way, which seems unlikely, so it more likely it was damaged during transit and the buyer should have contacted the carrier and filed a shipping damage claim.  I've received packages that were ripped, dented, etc, and sometimes damaged the item inside.  In these cases, I file a carrier claim and the carrier examines the packaging and the item to evaluate the claim.  If the buyer got goods damaged from transit, then they'd be justifiably upset as opposed to buyers remorse, but they should have contacted the carrier if the packaging showed damage.  


I have to say, concerning this aspect, that I don't know if items paid for using PayPal that have the PayPal Protection make a distinction between whether or not the shipper caused the SNAD or the buyer shipped in that condition and they just figure that the seller is responsible regardless because they have a claim in front of them.  Perhaps they figure the buyer would have filed a carrier claim if the damage was due to transit handling, otherwise they assume the issue then falls down to evaluating the claim as being one between the buyer and seller.


I'd suggest you ask the buyer for information about the outer packaging condition as received, the type and color of sticky residue found and if it was on the outside and inside of the packaging and ask her to submit a carrier claim with the shipper as you sent it in good condition and you didn't include any liquid or vicous items along with the wallet so the damage must have come while in the carrier's care.


I'd also inform PayPal of this aspect as well since the description of damage strongly points to the carrier being responsible for the damage and condition of the received item.


Good luck and let me know how it turns out.






New Community Member

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

Sounds like the same lady I am dealing with.  I listed a phone that I had customized and was in great working order. I wanted to keep the phone I loved it so much but I needed the money so I sold it. I packaged it up and included everything i had listed in the auction.  In the listing I noted there was one small chip on the side of the phone that did not affect it.  She got the phone and said she wanted me to give her $100 to have it fixed because it did affect how the phone worked. Then she stated that not everything was included in the auction. I have never been treated this way for a buyer so I did not know what to do. She messaged me and said that then the phone would not charge and she bought another charger and it still would not charge. I could not believe what I was hearing from this lady, I was so proud of this phone when I shipped it to her.  She then said she wanted a full refund. I told her know because the phone was in good working order when it was shipped to her. She opened a claim with paypal. Her feedback is only 3 and two were from me. Oh yeah before she got the phone she also bought from me a PSS system with games. I am sure she will say the same thing about it. What really bothers me is that there are people out there that are so mean and can do this to someone. I have been with ebay since 04 and 100% feedback. I have done everything right so I waiting while they have a hold on my paypal funds. The reason I sold the phone was to help pay my bills. The money that I so desperately needed but now this has cost me in more ways then I can say.  I believe what goes around comes around and she will get what is coming to her.

tl1 New Community Member
New Community Member

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

I so agree with you Kudos: 1,  This was exactly what I wanted to get across to buyer's too!  Iam glad you took the time to express it in this way it saved me the time to write it. Lets demand that paypal's policies are changed so it can be a better place to sell and buy online. If that doesnt happen then I hope someone with the resources will challenge ebay and give them some competition. Currently Paypal is a scam.  

       P.S. Check out eBay's new policy's .They have gotten better about their refunds .From now on dont file with Paypal file with ebay. I was recently treated very fair by ebay's new refund policy I applaud them for what they done for me. I got my money back and they paid for shipping both ways with no hassles I swear.


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

Hi tl 1,


Firstly, congrats if you got your return shipping costs to the seller reimbursed.

However, it is not POLICY in the eBay Protection to be reimbursed for the return shipping costs.  The policy is essentially the same as it was under the PayPal policy, as eBay owns Paypal (did you know this?).  They have merely shortened the number of days for having to wait to file a dispute from 10 to 7 and opened up the process to any transaction on eBay instead of just to those that used Paypal to pay.


The issue still remains that return shipping is required to be paid for by the seller.  Now some good sellers will do so and perhaps if you complain to eBay then they will pay for the return shipping but it is not stated as such in the policy as reflected in the following from eBay's section regarding


With eBay Buyer Protection, buyers will receive coverage for the purchase price of the item, plus original shipping.


This statement was the same under the Paypal policy so there is no change regarding the issue that buyers are still supposed to be the ones that pay for return shipping for SNAD.


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

OOOPS,  used the wrong word in my previous post.  In the statement, as show below, I meant to say "buyers" instead of "sellers".


WRONG use of term "seller" in the sentence:

The issue still remains that return shipping is required to be paid for by the seller. (It should have been "buyer")


It should have stated "buyer" instead of "seller", which I stated correctly later on in the post in conclusion.


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

I intend to file a claim with the Attorney General! Ebay has done nothing but give me a huge runaround. I keep telling them these sellers are using false advertising, advertise jewelry as 14K gold and send you merchandise that is pure junk. They keep sending me canned responses that have nothiing to do with my complaint.


I see that there are dozens of complaints from other buyers, I think it is time for someone to get seriou about this false advertising and if Ebay will not do it I will try.


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

Firstly, the type of issue you are describing falls under the category of FRAUD.  Did you open your dispute/claim under this category or did you use SNAD?


Fraud is a whole different process and you would likely be asked to get a expert to notarize the condition and value of the item you received and even possibly file a complaint with the police.


Supposedly, eBay has actual resources that involve police departments that look into such issues to go after theft rings, counterfeiters, etc, operating on eBay.  


I'd be interested to know how you filed your dispute and what eBay's response emails said.  Please post the contents for us to see what eBay is or isn't doing in your case.