Author Topic: Is eBay now disallowing cheques and bank transfers on the UK site? (Read 46637 times)

Bazza · « **Reply #100 on:** February 13, 2010, 12:41:05 AM »

Smee, I'd like to hear Chris's opinion on the future of .uk.co and the probability of PayPal only.

*Brum6y* · « **Reply #101 on:** February 13, 2010, 01:25:40 AM »

Quote from: Bazza on February 13, 2010, 12:22:15 AM

Here is an example just sent to me by a member of this forum. I have their permission to use it here.

Over the last 3 weeks, I've bought 38 items off ebay. Some from overseas and some from Aus. Not one of those sellers asked to be paid by DD or offered cheaper postage for DD. 29 of those sellers only accepted PP. I used PP for every one.

That statement begs more questions than anything. It has undefined conditions and variables that drastically affect the correct categorisation of the numbers supplied.

The only statement that I have no argument with is that the buyer "used PP for every one" - since eBay has ensured this option.

As an example of how meaningless this statement is, I will take it exactly as written and add my own notes. Further, since it is presented as a positive statement towards Paypal, I will make those notes in the opposite sense.

Over the last 3 weeks, I've bought 38 items off ebay. Some from overseas and some from Aus. (I'm not going to say how many of each, since that will give me away) Not one of those sellers asked to be paid by DD (Despite the fact that most of the ones in Australia said they accept or prefer DD, they didn't explicitly ASK me to pay by DD) or offered cheaper postage for DD (No, but half of them offered me a discount on their handling charges if I paid by DD). 29 of those sellers only accepted PP (They were the overseas sellers. They might accept other payment methods locally, but only accept PP for international sales - so, for ME, it is true that they would only accept PP). I used PP for every one (Mainly because I can get my money back if I want to... I know I won't have to have a good reason or any proof of anything).

Now, before you set out your righteous indignation as such a presumptuous corruption of the truth I have these two things to state:

1. My notes ARE a fabrication, fictional and are NOT a suggestion that this IS the case in this buyer's statement.
2. However, on the basis of the information given in the statement, THEY ARE AS VALID an interpretation as the superficial inference.

I am almost embarrassed for you in offering such a shallow example in an attempt to support your position.

I do hope, too, that you are able to understand my response is not denouncing Paypal or the buyer - just the purported value of the 'exhibit'.

... and even that is on the presumption that the statement is genuine.

Bazza · « **Reply #102 on:** February 13, 2010, 01:34:56 AM »

Your choice Brum6y. I'm sure the writer will read your comments with interest.

*Brum6y* · « **Reply #103 on:** February 13, 2010, 01:44:16 AM »

A political writer and, for that matter, a spin doctor from the corporate world, would take my scenario interpretation and reduce it to the statement offered.

Justification: There are no lies in the statement.

It is not a safe position to rely on inferences.

If the statement is genuine and the buyer is a member here, I would hope they can see the statement cited is not convincing. I welcome the writer's interest.

*Brum6y* · « **Reply #104 on:** February 13, 2010, 01:47:35 AM »

Quote from: Bazza on February 13, 2010, 01:34:56 AM

Your choice Brum6y. I'm sure the writer will read your comments with interest.

Errr ... Just what am I supposed to be choosing..?

Poddy · « **Reply #105 on:** February 13, 2010, 01:51:54 AM »

I'm sure the writer will read your comments with interest.

And even better if the buyer were to verify the validity if the quotation

, but perhaps that buyer is just to shy to say it themselves.

Bazza · « **Reply #106 on:** February 13, 2010, 02:00:48 AM »

Absolutely Poddy. That's a problem.

Brum6y, you chose to question the validity of the statement because I presented it. Why would that statement be any less valid than a quote from your 'seller friend'. The only reason I would think is because it sways towards supporting something you 'disagree' with. I do understand, I'm not sure you do.

Goodnight.

*Brum6y* · « **Reply #107 on:** February 13, 2010, 02:13:38 AM »

Quote from: *Brum6y* on February 13, 2010, 01:25:40 AM

I do hope, too, that you are able to understand my response is not denouncing Paypal or the buyer - just the purported value of the 'exhibit'.

It appears I was quite wrong.

I have neither stated my position for nor against the inference contained in the statement - just that the statement itself does not contain adequate information to be convincing.

*Brum6y* · « **Reply #108 on:** February 13, 2010, 02:21:43 AM »

Quote from: Bazza on February 13, 2010, 02:00:48 AM

Brum6y, you chose to question the validity of the statement because I presented it.

My, my. We are precious, aren't we?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but I would offer the same challenge on the validity of evidence submitted in similar circumstances, whether their ID was "Bazza", "RiffRaff" or "Rumplestiltskin".

Watch that first step off your high-horse ... you could land flat on your face.

Good night, Nick.

Bazza · « **Reply #109 on:** February 13, 2010, 08:32:59 AM »

How odd Brum6y. I can usually rely on you to be the one who sees things for what they are and not what you'd like them to be. You don't usually stoop to having a dig when others do. I'll put that down to a late night.

Roo · « **Reply #110 on:** February 13, 2010, 09:49:27 AM »

Good morning one and all...

Now....not wanting to cause a riff amongst all the posters here....I would like to add my 2c worth.

Looking at the example that Bazza mentioned (the numbers book), it seems that the listing is in UK currency and only available to the UK market.

Hence, the seller was able to include other forms of payment options in their listing.

I am unaware if the person that had trouble listing their item was using UK currency or US currency....but if they were listing on the US site, then wouldn't the US Ebay rules over ride the listers usual ability to include their prefered choice of payment?

This would, in effect, mean that it is impossible to list worldwide....and still maintain your preferences for local payments...and if you wished to do so...you would need to make two listings....which of course means that Ebay get two lots of fees..lol

I could be wrong of course...(naaahhh, only kidding..lol), but maybe Baz could find us a listing by a UK sellers that is listing in the US and has other methods of payment available?

Bazza · « **Reply #111 on:** February 13, 2010, 10:01:33 AM »

Probably not Roo but then we are talking about listings on ebay UK. What you are talking about has already been discussed on the UK ebay forum that Countessa posted a link to in the OP. You appear to have missed the point of this discussion.

*CountessA* · « **Reply #112 on:** February 13, 2010, 10:10:25 AM »

Roo has questioned this situation because it is an extremely confusing one. There is contradictory information and practice all over the place; no wonder it's still being mulled over and questioned!

Up to a short time ago, UK sellers were able to list on eBay.com (so that they attracted US buyers as well as local buyers) and include bank transfer and cheque as a payment method for UK buyers.

That has recently changed.

The question being thrown open is... does this imply payment method changes on the UK site?

When we begin to delve into this, we realise it's an ambiguous and confusing can of worms.

The payment method page on eBay.co.uk specifically states that bank transfer and cheque are NOT permitted on the UK site.

Some UK listings still include bank transfer and cheque as payment methods.

It is at least likely that some listings offering those payment methods have been removed.

Roo · « **Reply #113 on:** February 13, 2010, 10:21:46 AM »

You're right Countess...it is a bit confusing..mainly because it seems that Ebay UK has made no official mention of a change (if there is one) except in their terms which are well hidden.

That book listing still has about 9 days to run....and if the change is only recent, the seller may very likely be confronted with the fact that they may not be able to relist the book with the same conditions if it doesn't sell.

One of the things I find strange is that they can chop and change their rules without quoting an actual date as to when those rules will be enforced.

Most businesses usually make reference to the date of any changes in their terms and conditions...unlike Ebay when they do this by stealth.

*Brum6y* · « **Reply #114 on:** February 13, 2010, 01:18:55 PM »

Quote from: Bazza on February 13, 2010, 08:32:59 AM

How odd Brum6y. I can usually rely on you to be the one who sees things for what they are and not what you'd like them to be. You don't usually stoop to having a dig when others do. I'll put that down to a late night.

Dismiss it as you will.

However the time of day has no bearing on the fact that you claimed my challenge on the statement offered was based on who you are and not on the statement itself. Since you seem familiar with my posting style, such a claim would surely be incongruous with that understanding.

I am uncertain as to whether your 'take' derives from arrogance - that I should dare question the 'evidence' - from playing the role of 'victim' or from desperation - should you feel you have no other retort.

The fact remains that the statement offered is ambiguous and my fictional annotations were offered to demonstrate exactly that and are quite independent of the source.

You, or anybody who has observed my posts, should be well aware that I will concede a valid point even if it is 'in opposition' to a stated opinion and equally as true that I will not let an invalid argument stand unchallenged, especially if it is the basis of further discussion. Also, that when I have been wrong, I admit it. To do otherwise would compromise the validity of discussion and render any conclusions as highly suspect.

Quote from: Bazza on February 13, 2010, 02:00:48 AM

Brum6y, you chose to question the validity of the statement because I presented it.

I still find this claim fascinating

Quote

Why would that statement be any less valid than a quote from your 'seller friend'.

It is no less valid, nor is it any more valid. If the roles were reversed, I would be seeking clarification from my source and presenting additional details to underpin the veracity of the original statement - yet you have not even indicated an interest in doing so.

Quote

The only reason I would think is because it sways towards supporting something you 'disagree' with.

Already covered this misdirection ... and I still haven't bought any flyscreen doors for my submarine, either.

Quote

I do understand,

I am very sure you do.

Quote

I'm not sure you do.

Oh, but I do and only too well.

I find this diversion from the discussion is the 'storm in a teacup'. The cited statement is lacking. It needs more detailed support. Any personal interactions are a distraction. If you want to continue in this vein, then I must honestly question your motives since objective discussion of the thread topic is becoming a distant memory - but bring it on.

I would much rather get back to the topic, but if you insist.....

*Ubbie Max* · « **Reply #115 on:** February 13, 2010, 02:34:09 PM »

Smee or anyone else. Has Chris been contacted in the hope that some light may be shed on the subject?

*Ubbie Max* · « **Reply #116 on:** February 13, 2010, 03:20:01 PM »

Bazza your quote at Reply #94 is once again hearsay as you were not the one who conducted the Ebay transactions.

The person who, allegedly, emailed you with those comments is the person who should post the comments.

I tend to doubt whether you received any email at all or rather, you have concocted the statement yourself.

*smee* · « **Reply #117 on:** February 13, 2010, 03:41:27 PM »

Quote from: *Ubbie Max* on February 13, 2010, 02:34:09 PM

Smee or anyone else. Has Chris been contacted in the hope that some light may be shed on the subject?

I havent contacted him Birdie ... I can do as I have his email address if no else has made contact... although he is a member her and therefore should be easily contacable by anyone here via PM especially if he still has the email alert turned on ..

the reason why I havent contacted him is that I havent really been ative in this thread and didnt want to interfere ... so I thought I would leave it upto the OP or any other participants to make the contact if they wanted .... but I can email him if the general consesus is yes ask for his comments

*Ubbie Max* · « **Reply #118 on:** February 13, 2010, 03:49:32 PM »

G'day Smee. My thoughts are, yes, contact him.

*Brum6y* · « **Reply #119 on:** February 13, 2010, 04:29:19 PM »

I think Chris would be well placed to comment and I would support the invitation being issued.

*smee* · « **Reply #120 on:** February 13, 2010, 04:49:27 PM »

I have sent Chris a link and invited him to post his comments on this thread in regards to the original topic/question in the op

*Brum6y* · « **Reply #121 on:** February 13, 2010, 05:04:37 PM »

Thank you.

*Ubbie Max* · « **Reply #122 on:** February 13, 2010, 05:05:21 PM »

Good stuff Smee.

cueperkins · « **Reply #123 on:** February 13, 2010, 05:27:20 PM »

Quote from: Bazza on February 12, 2010, 11:37:44 PM

You would be surprised at the number of supportive emails I get from members here who are happy to sit on the sidelines and watch but don't wish to get involved.

*Excuse me while I take a brief detour from the topic...*

funny you should say that bazz and as with everything there is always two sides to a coin.....You'd be surprised how many emails I've received about your attitude towards other members on various occasions, but unlike yourself, I wouldn't want to betray the trust of those members by posting their comments here.......says quite a bit about your good self though huh? *makes note never to email bazza with any expectation of privacy*

I guess it just goes to show that “You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time.”

Abe Lincoln

Bazza · « **Reply #124 on:** February 13, 2010, 05:47:12 PM »

Enlighten me Cupie. Who's comments have I posted here and who have I betrayed?

Huh?

cueperkins · « **Reply #125 on:** February 13, 2010, 06:05:19 PM »

Quote from: Bazza on February 13, 2010, 12:22:15 AM

Here is an example just sent to me by a member of this forum. I have their permission to use it here.

Over the last 3 weeks, I've bought 38 items off ebay. Some from overseas and some from Aus. Not one of those sellers asked to be paid by DD or offered cheaper postage for DD. 29 of those sellers only accepted PP. I used PP for every one.

that one !!!...and if there is such a member, then they should post it themselves....if they exist.....

cueperkins · « **Reply #126 on:** February 13, 2010, 06:07:43 PM »

In fact, unless you asked them if you could publish it, I'd be a bit suss of anyone emailing me with their opinion, and inciting me to post it on their behalf....what is this a posting service?.....lol...

Bazza · « **Reply #127 on:** February 13, 2010, 06:17:22 PM »

Well I'm pretty sure there is no member here called 'that one'. Read the post again Cupie. I didn't even have to ask that person. They told me I was welcome to quote them.

what is this a posting service?..... Is there a new rule against quotes?

Poddy · « **Reply #128 on:** February 13, 2010, 06:35:02 PM »

Has this thread deteriorated to the level of kindegarten kids with kindegarten values and kindergarten logic?

Poddy · « **Reply #129 on:** February 13, 2010, 06:38:22 PM »

this is a friendly reminder of the topic

From a thread on the UK Round table:

Quote
before I went out tonight, I scheduled an item to start...[I use Auctiva}

Just come home to see No items For Sale on my ebay page!

Logged into auctiva to see....Error....ebay no longer accept bank transfers or cheques as payment methods!

Grrrr....they just want more and more dosh out of us by forcing paypoo on us!

tellomon · « **Reply #130 on:** February 13, 2010, 06:41:03 PM »

Yeah.

Stay ON topic.

How difficult is that?

The Sin Bin is looking quiet lately............

*Yibida* · « **Reply #131 on:** February 14, 2010, 01:44:41 AM »

IMO... Chris seems to be the best source of information regarding this subject... I do hope he comes here and clears this up... the roulette table of humble pie will be interesting ...LOL

News:

Author Topic: Is eBay now disallowing cheques and bank transfers on the UK site? (Read 46637 times)

Bazza

Bazza

Poddy

Bazza

Bazza

Bazza

cueperkins

Bazza

cueperkins

cueperkins

Bazza

Poddy

Poddy