Oz Round Table
The Oz Round Table boards => The Round Table => Topic started by: *Yibida* on May 07, 2009, 02:58:54 PM
-
Here's an extract from the new Ebay policy to be enforced
Obligations with respect to allegedly non-authentic items:
When buyers file a claim alleging that the item is not authentic.
For covered claims that meet the conditions and are not excluded, buyers are required to destroy an item if they claim it is not authentic. Once a buyer confirms destruction of the item, eBay will reimburse the buyer.
As a well known comedian said once " I see it.. but I don't believe it!"
:pigsfly:
-
Here's an extract from the new Ebay policy to be enforced
For covered claims that meet the conditions and are not excluded, buyers are required to destroy an item if they claim it is not authentic. Once a buyer confirms destruction of the item, eBay will reimburse the buyer.
and what proof will they consider as confirmation?
The bits mailed back by registered mail?
The bits mailed back in two envelopes to prevent theft?
Until I see the policy actually working - I don't believe it
-
I'm lost for words. This means that I can buy something, receive it, keep it, confirm to Ebay I have destroyed it :liar: probably by ticking a little box in a dispute panel, and Ebay will give my money back??? If I don't pay by Paypal are they going to access the seller's bank account and take it back?
Unfathomable. I know, I know, - the heads of Ebay Aus are a bunch of masochists who have run out of ways to torture themselves and everyone else, so they have gone for the ultimate gratification - no longer being content to ensure the slow continued disintegration of Ebay, they need to up the ante and ensure the total destruction of Ebay.
Well, they should get a couple of weeks pleasure out of this. Then they'll all go and run for parliment.
-
I can see the media stories now where sellers sue ebay and / or the buyer for destroying the alleged fake goods
while ebay wants proof that the item was destroyed what proof does it require that the item was indeed fake ?????
-
An example would be going to the drive in {you oldies will remember drive in's} not like the movie so you slash the seats, only to find out you went to the wrong drive in !
:roflmao:
-
BNWT, that is exactly what I was going to say.
The buyer gets their expensive item. They use it for the once off, show off reason they bought it for....wedding/girls night out/ any other outing, then email the seller saying it is fake and put in a claim to eBay who say 'destroy it', then their purchase price is refunded, no proof it was fake and seller loses. ??????
-
Well, they should get a couple of weeks pleasure out of this. Then they'll all go and run for parliment.
Fluffy.... :rofl:
-
This reminds me of a comment made on the US boards shortly after Christmas - where complaints were raised regarding purchased decorations being reported in January as 'not as described'. Paypal were reversing payments in buyers' favour - and the sellers were receiving their goods back in damaged condition. Well, perhaps the buyer can now save the return postage - and avoid the returning of the products! Just a picci of six sticks of gelignite and a stat-dec describing the bang should clearly demonstrate destruction. Innovative Destruction at its best!!!!
-
We'd best keep an eye on the situation so that we can see how this plays out in reality. If sellers are going to be at risk with false claims of "Fake! Fake!", I hope we can find a way to help all genuine sellers deal with this.
I'm a buyer rather than a seller, but I dread to think about the increasing vulnerability of sellers. Of course there's been a problem with some fake items being bought by buyers, but I don't think this is the way to handle it! Most of the stories of fake items I've read include the item being vastly, VASTLY cheaper than the genuine item - the buyers in some instances should have known that they were buying an imitation. It's a bit like a tourist in Egypt being told by a raggedly dressed urchin, "Mister, mister, I show you priceless antiques from King Tut! Very genuine, very good. You like. Very cheap. Pay only twenty american dollar. Genuine antique, I guarantee you, not like other urchins hawking fake items, only good stuff, I promise you." The tourist who hands over twenty US dollars for the item in question has fallen for one of the oldest cons of all - cheap genuine antique, attested to be genuine and antique by a BOY IN RAGGED CLOTHING.
The eBay seller who does something similar is not really a great deal more sophisticated, because it's the cheapness of the price which gives away the fact that this is NOT genuine - oh, and the fact that a look at the seller's completed listings include a whole ream of the Genuine Antique Crystal Ball which is supposedly one-of-a-kind, found hidden in the seller's aunt's attic or something.
A little bit of checking by the buyer, and the fakery is uncovered. Reluctance to check by the buyer can sometimes be a symptom of living in cloud-cuckoo land, not wanting to realise that the bargain is a fake and preferring to live in deluded hope of its being genuine. Has the buyer no responsibility at all to take reasonable precautions?
But... does eBay have any responsibility for what people sell on it? Yes - there have been precedent-affirming cases in which markets have been held accountable for what market stall owners have been selling (fakes, fakes and more fakes). So eBay has a responsibility - but is that responsibility met by enabling buyers to declare that the item purchased is a fake after the fact? Isn't the responsibility of eBay more pre-emptive than post-op? Isn't the post-op option enabling fraud on a large level?
How DOES the buyer establish that the item purchased is a fraud?
It's been a thorny question for a while. Sometimes eBay/PayPal would not accept anything except a signed statement on letterhead from the company making the original item - and of course that's impractical for many things. A stat dec has always had a significant weight in any such questions... but I worry that the way chosen now by eBay is an abdication of responsibility - moving so far from one position that the whole thing tips over, to genuine sellers' detriment.
As I said, let's see how it plays out. Perhaps in practical terms it won't be as easy to defraud as I fear...
-
Bnwt:
while ebay wants proof that the item was destroyed what proof does it require that the item was indeed fake ?????
I'd give anything to have your brain, Bnwt
I nominate the above gem for OZ RT Quote of the Week Award :youaretheman:
-
I can see the media stories now where sellers sue ebay and / or the buyer for destroying the alleged fake goods
while ebay wants proof that the item was destroyed what proof does it require that the item was indeed fake ?????
It just keeps getting weirder and weirder.....
It all comes from San Jose, California.......
Surf's up!
:titanic:
-
Hmmmm...the Paypal User Agreement states...
Buyer Responsibilities.
You must respond to any PayPal enquiries regarding your claim for a discretionary payment under the Buyer Protection Policy within the time specified by PayPal. If you fail to respond to PayPal's request for more information then PayPal will not continue to process your claim or otherwise assist you in relation to your complaint and the claim will be closed and may not be reopened.
If you file a claim in relation to a 'significantly not as described' item, we may require you to ship the item at your expense to the seller, to PayPal, or to a third party designated by PayPal. In addition, we may require you, at your expense, to obtain documentation from a qualified third party to substantiate your claim, or to verify that you have destroyed the item if we request you to do so. In some instances, we may require you to supply a copy of a police report substantiating your claim.
https://www.paypal.com/au/au/cgi-bin/webscr?PPREDIRECT=d14JEcdNcFIHY4ChV7jO9dHp1AA4-aV-H9xpjLfhE7421Qo3MDzfp0PDxDIjWgOIkro1IXnBEY165ICNknTKPImGVcBV8R8ZH54aA3giqT3mSLK9
There doesn't seem to be any changes made there.
I have been away for a while....any link available to this Ebay policy Yibida?
:beer: I'll shout you one of these if you can post it! ;D
-
Roo, will you shout me one?
http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/user-agreement.html
-
I've got an old $2 note - I'd love to sell to a scamming buyer.
Let them call it a fake and destroy it - when they provide the proof of it's destruction, send in the Federal police - and some TV crews.
-
A pot of VB is on it's way Countess! :thanks:
Now...let's see...
The Ebay policy says....
eBay Purchase Protection
Buyers and sellers share the responsibility of making sure purchases facilitated by eBay are exciting, rewarding and hassle-free. We strongly encourage buyers to work with sellers before opening a claim relating to a purchase. When a buyer doesn't receive an item or the item doesn't match what was described, and the seller doesn't provide adequate resolution to the buyer, eBay will reimburse the buyer subject to the conditions, exclusions and coverage limitations of the eBay Purchase Protection policy. eBay will reimburse the buyer up to the full purchase price plus shipping and other specific transaction costs paid by the buyer to the seller, as described in the eBay Purchase Protection policy. The eBay Purchase Protection policy is part of this Agreement and incorporated by reference.
Oh please give me strength! Ebay want buyers and sellers to make sure that all transactions are exciting, rewarding and hassle free? :roflmao:
Who on Earth wrote this dribble?
The whole policy seems to completely ignore Paypals requirements.
And what's with this bit?....
Obligations with respect to allegedly non-authentic items:
For covered claims that meet the conditions and are not excluded, buyers are required to destroy an item if they claim it is not authentic. Once a buyer confirms destruction of the item, eBay will reimburse the buyer.
For covered claims that meet the conditions and are not excluded, sellers agree to not hold buyers or eBay responsible for the destruction of an item if it is not believed to be authentic.
I am tempted to go to Live Help and have a play with them..lol :evil:
I wonder what their spiel is on the whole policy..
-
Brumby...I have 5 x $1 notes...in perfect condition...all in consecutive numbers...that have been preserved in a plastic bag since the seventies.
Are they worth more than $5 these days? :spend:
-
Ebay moto::::: wer'e not happy till your not happy....LOLOLOLOLOL.....Give me strength !!!!
-
Sorry Roo, I have no idea. Not a collector.
Just had an old $2 note that seems to have hung around - and it would be just like some dimwit who's never seen one in circulation to claim it was a fake... and destroy Commonwealth property ;D
-
Ebay moto::::: wer'e not happy till your not happy....LOLOLOLOLOL.....Give me strength !!!!
Oh Yibida...that would be funny...if it wasn't so true...
-
No probs Brumby...but I am curious..lol
They are just sitting in the bottom of my undies drawer.
Hey! Maybe I should mention that they are with my undies?
I could make a motza! :yess:
-
Wouldn't some buyer be surprised if they got the notes....with a pair of my Big Girls Panties! :roflmao:
-
Evening Roo, I think including your 'special storage' for your banknotes would cause great excitement amongst the banknote collectors! :banana:
-
G'Day Roo,
Your $1 notes may be worth a lot... As an ex collector I have paid up to $150 each for the first issue of $1 notes in uncirculated condition..
A tip... Do not store them in plastic, as plastic is acidic... You could go to a numismatic dealer ( such as Downies in The Block Arcade ) and get some special stuff to store them in...
If you want a true valuation of your notes, Downies may help there too...
Condition is everyhting... What you think is "uncirculted" may well be "extra fine" to someone else. And the value difference between the two is huge...
For extra help on this, I think Jonnjenn is a good member to ask..
Cheers