Ebay word to the wise

[Bill G]

Originally Posted by rcers

Nope that is not correct on standard deals.

Here is a site with plenty of folks left holding the bag.

http://www.paypalsucks.com/

Here is the small print...only some deals qualify...not all.

For items purchased on eBay look for either a PayPal or eBay purchase or buyer protection message in the eBay listing. If you see a message and you meet the eligibility requirements, then your purchase is covered by PayPal Purchase Protection. The purchase or buyer protection message will vary based on the eBay website. The message must appear on the top part of the listing and not under the “Description” or “Shipping and Payments” tabs. If the listing does not include the purchase or buyer protection message, then it is not eligible for PayPal Purchase Protection.

So all the deals on other sites, personal transactions outside of Ebay are not covered.

Mike

Yep, that's a problem for me. I don't care for business deals with fine print. It's been the whole problem with "buyer protection" from day one. Buyer Protection does not say as an across the board policy, that if you don't get the item you ordered, you will be refunded, period. When you buy from other businesses on the web, it is expected that if you don't get the item you ordered, then you will be refunded. Of course they may not refund you, but they cannot legally get away with it.

Originally Posted by Sir Crash-A-Lot

As the owner of an online hobby shop I think Paypal is great for the buyer but really is terrible for the seller. I had a customer that recently bought a Castle Ice 50 and a Scorpion 2221-6 from me. When he received the items he told Paypal the motor shaft was visually bent the solder job on the ESC was bad. Both items were new in the box, in fact I picked up the ESC and shipped it out the same day.

Paypal froze my account before I could even make a response to any accusations made against me. I work graveyard shift and the claim was filed at 2 PM and my account was frozen at 3PM. Even worse than that I had to PROVE the items I shipped were as describe which I could not do since they were new although I did provide the receipts showing when I purchased the ESC.

I contacted the buyer as soon as I could, asked him to send the item back, and I would refund his money. My account still was frozen though because he felt like I ripped him off since I did not respond in less than 1 hour.

Any how I got the items back, he got his money, and none of his claims were valid. The ESC was fine (normal Castle solder job) and I took the motor to the machine shop at work where the found less than .001 run out on the shaft. This buyer must have one heck of an eye.

My point is Paypal seems to think the seller is always wrong and the buyer is always right even thou in this case the buyer obviously changed his mind after the sale.

Mike

Countless sellers have been ripped off by Paypal. There's a big problem with letting an auction service monopolize internet sales, and make all the rules. As I commented on before here, if you consider yourself to be a reasonable, honest, and trustworthy seller, you should not have to put up with their terms. On the same hand, if you believe you are buying from a reasonable, honest, and trustworthy seller, there is no reason that you should need or even want Paypal to be in the equation.

Originally Posted by copterrichie

Mike, this has evolved over time. I recall back in the early days, there was lots of fraudulent transactions on Ebay. Something had to happen to protect the consumer which is Paypals/Ebay's mainline business. Also back in the days of Packard Bell, they did a study and found that if you have a satisfied customer, they MAY tell four people about their experience, but if you have a dissatisfied customer, they will tall a minimum of fourteen. Sad but honesty is not a virtue anymore.

What also evolves over time is their ability to set rules and rule in such ways that hurt the vendor, AFTER they have monopolized the service. Anyone with business sense could have called all of the changes in policy over time, from day one. They're not the first to work the concept.

[JetPlaneFlyer]

Originally Posted by Bill G

Yep, that's a problem for me. I don't care for business deals with fine print. It's been the whole problem with "buyer protection" from day one. Buyer Protection does not say as an across the board policy, that if you don't get the item you ordered, you will be refunded, period. When you buy from other businesses on the web, it is expected that if you don't get the item you ordered, then you will be refunded. Of course they may not refund you, but they cannot legally get away with it.

Bill,
What you are overlooking here is the fact that Paypal is not the seller. You are entitled to the same legally abiding guarantees from the seller (whoever that is) regardless if you pay using Paypal or any other form of funding. In the 'good old days' you would have used cash or a cheque to pay for your goods. If the deal went bad and the seller wouldn't do the right thing, then barring court action you were out of pocket. Paypal at least gives you some form accessible of buyer protection. Even if it doesn't cover every imaginable transaction I struggle to comprehend how offering some cover, where there used to be none, can be seen as a bad thing

Originally Posted by Bill G

Countless sellers have been ripped off by Paypal. There's a big problem with letting an auction service monopolize internet sales, and make all the rules. As I commented on before here, if you consider yourself to be a reasonable, honest, and trustworthy seller, you should not have to put up with their terms. On the same hand, if you believe you are buying from a reasonable, honest, and trustworthy seller, there is no reason that you should need or even want Paypal to be in the equation.

I've got some sympathy with the sellers as Paypal definitely favours the buyer, and the selling fees can be a bit steep IMHO. However Paypal is far from a monopoly, most retailers take credit and debit cards. It's really only private transactions where Paypal has become dominant.

[Bill G]

Originally Posted by JetPlaneFlyer

I've got some sympathy with the sellers as Paypal definitely favours the buyer, and the selling fees can be a bit steep IMHO. However Paypal is far from a monopoly, most retailers take credit and debit cards. It's really only private transactions where Paypal has become dominant.

True, they are not a complete monopoly. Certain questionable business practices can make a business into a virtual monopoly however. I am surprised that there hasn't been more class actions suits however, involving business transactions and not private.

A potential class action lawsuit would involve the fact that most retailers do take credit and debit cards, and use comparable encrypted safe cart software. I wouldn't be surprised if a case is currently underway. I imagine Ebay has not monopolized the shopping cart business, but I understand a number of popular shopping cart software packages are now sold by Ebay, likely using the same software that they use. What strikes me is that Paypal still uses the across the board slogan, "A safer way to shop". This has caused a number of people to believe that their card info could be compromised when not using Paypal, even when a vendor's private cart is using the same Ebay encrypted software. In that case, they are not an across the board "safer" way to shop, but simply offer certain potential assurances that others do not. Customers see 5 or so potential purchasing methods, and one is able to make the blanket statement, "A safer way to shop". I don't believe that they should legally be able to use the slogan, as it is not definitive and therefore incorrect, but apparently they are still getting away with it. It's monopolistic by default.