care to explain why if you were interested in the item but the pictures weren't all that clear, why not ask for better pics ? kinda sounds like POSSIBLY... you hoped the bad pics would keep the bidding down, and the item would be better than the pics,
regardless of how many posts I have, I don't consider myself an "expert" at anything
<< <i>One last try. If I had said "I'd like to send this back for a full refund", it would be OK. But if I say "I'd either like to send this back for a full refund, or keep it with a partial refund", this is not OK. Or is the problem the order of how it is said, ie "I'd either like to keep the item and receive a partial refund, or send it back for a full refund" is not OK. I'm just trying to understand the logic. >>
Regardless of how YOU state it, it can always come off as extortion.
If the SELLER initiates the conversation in that direction, then that's ok because the "seller" is in control. When you state you'd like either a full refund with a return or a "partial" refund, then YOU are "seeking" control which can be construed as extortion.
Never ever ask for a partial refund. Simply contact the seller stating that you'll be returning the item for a, b, and c reasons. Let the seller initiate any partial refund talks.
Its a very simple concept since eBay put all the "power" into the buyers hands via the feedback mechanism. Sellers can only receive negative or neutral feedback, which hurts their bottom line, while buyers can "give" negative feedback.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
The photo and the description should be both independant and supporting. They weren't. They were contradictory.
IMO, seller had your $1,000 either physically spent or committed. His bravo sierra about another ' buyer' Lined up was wasted rhetoric. Otherwise he would have just refunded.
I double checked the refund the seller sent, and it was not a refund at all but a new payment, which I had to pay PayPal fees on. I wrote back and asked him to either pay the fees, or to provide a refund of the original payment, upon which time I would provide a refund for the payment he gave me. Will be interesting to see what he does. I want to be made whole out of this, and I assume he does as much as he can be (he had to foot shipping both ways).
There seems to be a misconception of what I said to the seller and documented in the OP. I did NOT demand a partial refund of 33%. It would have been completely inappropriate for me to do that. I also did not immediately put in a SNAD as I know that goes against the seller and I had no reason to want to harm his eBay standing. I gave him the option of letting me return the item, OR of giving me the partial refund. Note the word "OR" in that sentence. If the seller did not want to give me the partial refund, he could simply have chosen to have me send the item back to him for a full refund. That is what "OR" means in this context. Giving him the choice the way I did gave him full discretion on how to proceed, but instead he chose to try to intimidate me into keeping the item under threat of action against me by eBay.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
<< <i>care to explain why if you were interested in the item but the pictures weren't all that clear, why not ask for better pics ? kinda sounds like POSSIBLY... you hoped the bad pics would keep the bidding down, and the item would be better than the pics, >>
I was assured by the buyer that the item was in mint condition. The pics showed "something" going on that might have been artifacts of the photo or similar, and I gave him benefit of the doubt based on his answer. If there was any concern on his part that the photos would cause a lower final price, then he could have posted his answer to my question, or new photos. So indeed, I did expect it would be better than the pics!
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
<< <i>When you state you'd like either a full refund with a return or a "partial" refund, then YOU are "seeking" control which can be construed as extortion. >>
Saying "I would like to return the item for full refund, or accept a partial refund" gives the seller MORE control than saying "I would like to return the item for full refund".
I find it interesting that my original item #4 has not been brought up. In fact that was the item the seller had the most issue with, not the partial refund request.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
<< <i>When you state you'd like either a full refund with a return or a "partial" refund, then YOU are "seeking" control which can be construed as extortion. >>
Saying "I would like to return the item for full refund, or accept a partial refund" gives the seller MORE control than saying "I would like to return the item for full refund".
I find it interesting that my original item #4 has not been brought up. In fact that was the item the seller had the most issue with, not the partial refund request. >>
That's just as bad as the buyer bringing up a partial refund. If the seller brings it up, that's fine. For the buyer to bring either one up..... not classy and I would give the full refund and block the buyer... and I don't block folks easily.
<< <i>In the future, I would recommend just opening a SNAD claim with eBay. The seller will be notified, and will have a fixed length of time to respond. A negotiated settlement won't be out of the question, but if it's a simple disagreement over the definition of "mint", the buyer (you) will win 100% of the time. Assuming the seller isn't abusive in that scenario, I wouldn't leave a neg. If he really digs in, I might leave a "neutral" as a courtesy to future prospective buyers. Assuming I got the refund without undue hardship, I probably would leave no feedback. >>
Meanwhile even if the seller ends up being right, he still gets dinged because the case was opened in the first place. I've had SNAD cases opened where I could point to the problem the buyer described being stated verbatim in the listing, but I'm dinged as soon as the buyer opens the case instead of just emailing. If the seller won't help and you really think you're right, fine, but outside of egregious fraud, have the courtesy to just email the seller and let him make it right before opening a case. >>
I was under the impression that if the seller issues a full refund, he will not "get dinged". Perhaps the policy was changed at some point. (?)
Odd that he would refund you via a new payment as he would get his paypal fees back automatically by using the refund link.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Odd that he would refund you via a new payment as he would get his paypal fees back automatically by using the refund link. >>
He has a low feedback rating (<50) so has not figured these things out yet.
He just gave me an additional payment to cover the fees. I guess he figured it wasn't worth the $63 to go through the back and forth refund.
It seems the consensus is that I should not have asked for partial refund, or for a reduction in another auction, and that it is the seller's prerogative to do those things. So, how would that go? How about the following exchange:
Buyer: The item you sent is in worse condition than you described, and I'd like to return it for refund. Please let me know address to return the item. Seller: So sorry you're not happy with the item. Can I offer you a partial refund to offset the value difference due to the damage? Buyer: No, thank you. I just want to return for refund please. Seller: Perhaps I can give you a discount on another similar item I have for sale? Buyer: NO! I don't need 2 of them! I WANT MY MONEY BACK!
Is that how it should go? Seems telling the seller the acceptable options up-front makes more sense.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
<< <i>Odd that he would refund you via a new payment as he would get his paypal fees back automatically by using the refund link. >>
He has a low feedback rating (<50) so has not figured these things out yet.
He just gave me an additional payment to cover the fees. I guess he figured it wasn't worth the $63 to go through the back and forth refund.
It seems the consensus is that I should not have asked for partial refund, or for a reduction in another auction, and that it is the seller's prerogative to do those things. So, how would that go? How about the following exchange:
Buyer: The item you sent is in worse condition than you described, and I'd like to return it for refund. Please let me know address to return the item. Seller: So sorry you're not happy with the item. Can I offer you a partial refund to offset the value difference due to the damage? Buyer: No, thank you. I just want to return for refund please. Seller: Perhaps I can give you a discount on another similar item I have for sale? Buyer: NO! I don't need 2 of them! I WANT MY MONEY BACK!
Is that how it should go? Seems telling the seller the acceptable options up-front makes more sense. >>
You can phrase it any way you want to, but as someone stated earlier, requesting a partial refund is goiing to come off in a less than favorable fashion in most cases, particularly since ebay rules already favor the buyer and sellers (and buyers) know this. The truth of the matter is that many people who fish for "partial" refunds have less than justifiable reasons for doing so and are simply taking advantage of an ebay systyem that inherently provides buyers with most of the leverage. I'm not saying you are in that category, but that is the reality of the situation.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Logically, it doesn't make sense for the BUYER to propose a partial refund on an auction (which is what I'm assuming this was). Someone else bid just slightly less than what you won it for, and they might be perfectly satisfied with the item. So go ahead and tell the seller you aren't satisfied and would like to return the item. If the SELLER wants to avoid the hassle of a return and either a second chance offer to the underbidder or just relisting it, then he can propose a partial refund.
<< <i>I wonder why half the "eBay problem" threads appear to be self induced problems??
Just forget it and never, ever, ever, ask for a "partial refund" for an item which was purchased. It ALWAYS appears like extortion as this is why eBay has a global return policy which buyers can use. >>
I really think that the above sums the whole thing up perfectly.
I have no doubt that your intentions were exactly as stated. Still, 19Lyds sums it up perfectly.
<< <i>He has a low feedback rating (<50) so has not figured these things out yet. He just gave me an additional payment to cover the fees. I guess he figured it wasn't worth the $63 to go through the back and forth refund. It seems the consensus is that I should not have asked for partial refund, or for a reduction in another auction, and that it is the seller's prerogative to do those things. >>
I would be forgiving after he gave the final $63. Say thanks and move on maybe without giving feedback. In any case I wouldn't neg or neutral after a full refund.
I think that sometimes asking for a partial refund may make sense if an item is described poorly, it saves return shipping (in this case it would also save that $63). The problem is that sellers will probably take it wrong so it's best to only ask for a return and if the seller offers a partial refund then take it or pass. I had one similar buy, a problem that wasn't mentioned and I asked for a return or partial refund, in reality I preferred a full refund but thought I was being helpful to avoid shipping and time and if I kept it then I would have had to sell it because the problem bothered me. The seller said return it or keep it. I returned it and watched it sell again for a lot less, probably because there was only one other strong bidder the second time around.
if you had any reason to believe the item was not going to be to your liking, ask for more pics. why would you NOT ask for better pics ? the members of this board have the misconception that everything on ebay is an approval sale. its difficult if not impossible to believe you see something in the pics that you don't like but bid anyway, then you win the item, receive the item, then expect the seller to refund 1/3rd of your money.... when he doesn't you call it a "fiasco" if its a fiasco its one that could have EASILY been avoided. asking the seller for a refund of 1/3 of what you paid is never going to go over well. you don't owe the seller a neg, you owe him a thank you for a lesson that cost you nothing.
regardless of how many posts I have, I don't consider myself an "expert" at anything
<< <i>asking the seller for a refund of 1/3 of what you paid is never going to go over well. if you had any reason to believe the item was not going to be to your liking, ask for more pics. >>
I asked him about the condition, and he reassured me it was mint.
<< <i> the members of this board have the misconception that everything on ebay is an approval sale. if the listing said no returns, why would you NOT ask for better pics ? >>
No returns means the auction is per the description and pics. The description say it was "used but in a new condition". Pic (actually, pic) was inconclusive. Seller reassured me it was mint. It was not.
<< <i>its difficult if not impossible to believe you see something in the pics that you don't like but bid anyway, then you win the item, receive the item, then expect the seller to refund 1/3rd of your money.... >>
I did not expect him to refund the money. I offered that as an option in case he preferred not to accept the item back for full refund. I was being nice.
<< <i>when he doesn't you call it a "fiasco" if its a fiasco its one YOU could have avoided with a simple request for better pics. you don't owe the seller a neg, you owe him a thank you for a lesson that cost you nothing. why "approval" people even use ebay is beyond me unless they just need something to complain about. >>
I did not buy the item on approval. I bought it expecting it to be in mint, new condition per the item description and reassurances from the seller. The "fiasco" part of this was being threatened by the seller when the item did not live up to his words.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
<< <i>asking the seller for a refund of 1/3 of what you paid is never going to go over well. if you had any reason to believe the item was not going to be to your liking, ask for more pics. >>
I asked him about the condition, and he reassured me it was mint.
<< <i> the members of this board have the misconception that everything on ebay is an approval sale. if the listing said no returns, why would you NOT ask for better pics ? >>
No returns means the auction is per the description and pics. The description say it was "used but in a new condition". Pic (actually, pic) was inconclusive. Seller reassured me it was mint. It was not.
<< <i>its difficult if not impossible to believe you see something in the pics that you don't like but bid anyway, then you win the item, receive the item, then expect the seller to refund 1/3rd of your money.... >>
I did not expect him to refund the money. I offered that as an option in case he preferred not to accept the item back for full refund. I was being nice.
<< <i>when he doesn't you call it a "fiasco" if its a fiasco its one YOU could have avoided with a simple request for better pics. you don't owe the seller a neg, you owe him a thank you for a lesson that cost you nothing. why "approval" people even use ebay is beyond me unless they just need something to complain about. >>
I did not buy the item on approval. I bought it expecting it to be in mint, new condition per the item description and reassurances from the seller. The "fiasco" part of this was being threatened by the seller when the item did not live up to his words. >>
Problem #1... "used but in a new condition". Huh? What does that even mean? If it's used, it's USED. Not new. Common sense 101, anyone?
Problem #2... Use of the word "mint". Unless it's a) being used as a description of a facility that strikes coins or b) followed by the word "state", in my experience, usage of this term by a seller usually means that they have little/no clue of how to evaluate condition.
Problem #3... Image shows an apparent problem- yet buyer ignores it in lieu of seller saying it's "mint". Why not simply ASK him up front, "I see (whatever flaw) at (location) on the item. Would you please look to see if it exists?" Again, common sense 101.
Problem #4... Asking for a specific amount/percentage partial refund. As a long time eBay seller my gut reaction to requests like this is that the buyer's trying to negotiate a back end discount. Either keep it or return it. Period.
Problem #5... Acknowledging that one is participating in a clearly noted "no-returns auction", but despite #1,2 and 3 above, still feels entitled to a return or partial refund anyway. (I actually blame eBay and PP for this one; seller terms mean nothing anymore thanks to buyer-centric policies...but most buyers would still ignore them regardless. Sigh.)
<< <i> Problem #1... "used but in a new condition". Huh? What does that even mean? If it's used, it's USED. Not new. Common sense 101, anyone? >>
I don't see the problem. Basically, it means "like new". You can't call a used item "new" if the item is used.
<< <i>Problem #2... Use of the word "mint". Unless it's a) being used as a description of a facility that strikes coins or b) followed by the word "state", in my experience, usage of this term by a seller usually means that they have little/no clue of how to evaluate condition. >>
<< <i>Problem #3... Image shows an apparent problem- yet buyer ignores it in lieu of seller saying it's "mint". Why not simply ASK him up front, "I see (whatever flaw) at (location) on the item. Would you please look to see if it exists?" Again, common sense 101.
Problem #4... Asking for a specific amount/percentage partial refund. As a long time eBay seller my gut reaction to requests like this is that the buyer's trying to negotiate a back end discount. Either keep it or return it. Period. >>
I gave him the choice to return it or give a partial refund. I did not try to negotiate at all, just told him what I was willing to accept, and let him decide. I did actually want to keep the item, it just wasn't worth what I paid for it since it was in worse condition than described.
<< <i>Problem #5... Acknowledging that one is participating in a clearly noted "no-returns auction", but despite #1,2 and 3 above, still feels entitled to a return or partial refund anyway. (I actually blame eBay and PP for this one; seller terms mean nothing anymore thanks to buyer-centric policies...but most buyers would still ignore them regardless. Sigh.) >>
A "no-returns auction" relies on an accurate description. If the auction says the item is "like new / mint" but it is used / damaged, the buyer is not expected to accept the item.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
Problem #1... "used but in a new condition". Huh? What does that even mean? If it's used, it's USED. Not new. Common sense 101, anyone?
I don't see the problem. Basically, it means "like new". You can't call a used item "new" if the item is used.
He said "used but in a new condition", not "used but in a like new condition". You however interpreted it as the latter.
Problem #2... Use of the word "mint". Unless it's a) being used as a description of a facility that strikes coins or b) followed by the word "state", in my experience, usage of this term by a seller usually means that they have little/no clue of how to evaluate condition.
From your broken link..."SUMMARY: "Mint" means perfect, if the item's not literally in perfect shape, it's not mint." This is a typical eBay one size fits all definition. A used item by definition shows signs of use, thus it cannot be perfect.
Problem #3... Image shows an apparent problem- yet buyer ignores it in lieu of seller saying it's "mint". Why not simply ASK him up front, "I see (whatever flaw) at (location) on the item. Would you please look to see if it exists?" Again, common sense 101.
This was conveniently ignored...perhaps because someone didn't think to ask said question, which would have uncovered the flaws in question, making all of this silly drama unnecessary?
Problem #4... Asking for a specific amount/percentage partial refund. As a long time eBay seller my gut reaction to requests like this is that the buyer's trying to negotiate a back end discount. Either keep it or return it. Period.
I gave him the choice to return it or give a partial refund. I did not try to negotiate at all, just told him what I was willing to accept, and let him decide. I did actually want to keep the item, it just wasn't worth what I paid for it since it was in worse condition than described.
Regardless of your intent, the act of asking for a partial refund is looked upon by many sellers as an after the sale attempt at getting a discount; it happens a lot, and many have given in to such extortion simply to preserve their FB record and DSRs. We have a strict "keep it or return it for a full refund" policy.
Problem #5... Acknowledging that one is participating in a clearly noted "no-returns auction", but despite #1,2 and 3 above, still feels entitled to a return or partial refund anyway. (I actually blame eBay and PP for this one; seller terms mean nothing anymore thanks to buyer-centric policies...but most buyers would still ignore them regardless. Sigh.)
A "no-returns auction" relies on an accurate description. If the auction says the item is "like new / mint" but it is used / damaged, the buyer is not expected to accept the item.
In a normal scenario, a "no returns" auction means just that. No returns, period. You are buying the item AS IS, so you are expected to ask all pertinent questions before bidding and be prepared to own the item once you have bid, as bidding means you agree to the seller's terms. Of course the new and improved eBay has now created a system where buyers have multiple avenues to weasel out of a transaction... thus sellers now need to understand that they are a de facto approval service, and many buyers will gladly take full advantage of it.
<< <i>A "no-returns auction" relies on an accurate description. If the auction says the item is "like new / mint" but it is used / damaged, the buyer is not expected to accept the item.
In a normal scenario, a "no returns" auction means just that. No returns, period. You are buying the item AS IS, so you are expected to ask all pertinent questions before bidding and be prepared to own the item once you have bid, as bidding means you agree to the seller's terms. Of course the new and improved eBay has now created a system where sellers have multiple avenues to weasel out of a transaction... thus sellers now need to understand that they are a de facto approval service, and many buyers will gladly take full advantage of it. >>
Agreed, it is not a good situation for sellers who would attempt to use the "no returns" umbrella to try pulling a fast one.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
<The item was still usable, and indeed (it) is quite rare in any condition,>
At first, I couldn't get past this statement. An item that rarely comes on the market but yet it's condition was a factor in its return.
And secondly, I just don't bother with "no return" auctions. But once in a blue moon, I will try to persuade the seller otherwise. The bask lash of being too picky or wanting high quality. But for the majority of "no return" sellers, I'll respect their position and simply not bother.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
I'd like to thank everyone again for their input in this thread. I started it looking for guidance on whether or not to give a negative to a seller that threatened me when I asked for a refund, but I got a much more varied and interesting response than expected. I hope that I did not offend anyone with my responses, and if so I apologize for that. I certainly learned a few things from both the eBay experience and from the public airing of it, and that was unexpected and welcome.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
<< <i>I'd like to thank everyone again for their input in this thread. I started it looking for guidance on whether or not to give a negative to a seller that threatened me when I asked for a refund, but I got a much more varied and interesting response than expected. I hope that I did not offend anyone with my responses, and if so I apologize for that. I certainly learned a few things from both the eBay experience and from the public airing of it, and that was unexpected and welcome. >>
<< <i>A "no-returns auction" relies on an accurate description. If the auction says the item is "like new / mint" but it is used / damaged, the buyer is not expected to accept the item.
In a normal scenario, a "no returns" auction means just that. No returns, period. You are buying the item AS IS, so you are expected to ask all pertinent questions before bidding and be prepared to own the item once you have bid, as bidding means you agree to the seller's terms. Of course the new and improved eBay has now created a system where sellers have multiple avenues to weasel out of a transaction... thus sellers now need to understand that they are a de facto approval service, and many buyers will gladly take full advantage of it. >>
Agreed, it is not a good situation for sellers who would attempt to use the "no returns" umbrella to try pulling a fast one. >>
Oops...I just corrected my post; it should have read " ...a system where BUYERS have multiple avenues to weasel out of a transaction..." Guess I need to proofread better.
be thankful it is so easy to get a refund, in the old days of ebay....prior to the adoption of the "walmart mentality" a buyer would have to work for a refund so a buyer actually invested a little effort into being sure what he was buying wasn't gonna go back. back then there were much better coins to choose from, gee, I wonder if there is any correlation ...
regardless of how many posts I have, I don't consider myself an "expert" at anything
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>Asking for a partial refund comes off as douche-y
You may not have meant it that way, but just sayin'.... >>
Another nuanced opinion with no logical reasoning that is beyond my comprehension.
Please, no more responses to this thread, OK? >>
Huh?
If you don't want opinions then don't ask and better yet, don't respond to posts you don't care for by telling them not to post anymore.
Sheesh!
The name is LEE!
<< <i>One last try. If I had said "I'd like to send this back for a full refund", it would be OK. But if I say "I'd either like to send this back for a full refund, or keep it with a partial refund", this is not OK. Or is the problem the order of how it is said, ie "I'd either like to keep the item and receive a partial refund, or send it back for a full refund" is not OK. I'm just trying to understand the logic. >>
Regardless of how YOU state it, it can always come off as extortion.
If the SELLER initiates the conversation in that direction, then that's ok because the "seller" is in control.
When you state you'd like either a full refund with a return or a "partial" refund, then YOU are "seeking" control which can be construed as extortion.
Never ever ask for a partial refund. Simply contact the seller stating that you'll be returning the item for a, b, and c reasons. Let the seller initiate any partial refund talks.
Its a very simple concept since eBay put all the "power" into the buyers hands via the feedback mechanism. Sellers can only receive negative or neutral feedback, which hurts their bottom line, while buyers can "give" negative feedback.
The name is LEE!
IMO, seller had your $1,000 either physically spent or committed. His bravo sierra about another ' buyer'
Lined up was wasted rhetoric. Otherwise he would have just refunded.
Move on. Karma will take care of things.
I double checked the refund the seller sent, and it was not a refund at all but a new payment, which I had to pay PayPal fees on. I wrote back and asked him to either pay the fees, or to provide a refund of the original payment, upon which time I would provide a refund for the payment he gave me. Will be interesting to see what he does. I want to be made whole out of this, and I assume he does as much as he can be (he had to foot shipping both ways).
There seems to be a misconception of what I said to the seller and documented in the OP. I did NOT demand a partial refund of 33%. It would have been completely inappropriate for me to do that. I also did not immediately put in a SNAD as I know that goes against the seller and I had no reason to want to harm his eBay standing. I gave him the option of letting me return the item, OR of giving me the partial refund. Note the word "OR" in that sentence. If the seller did not want to give me the partial refund, he could simply have chosen to have me send the item back to him for a full refund. That is what "OR" means in this context. Giving him the choice the way I did gave him full discretion on how to proceed, but instead he chose to try to intimidate me into keeping the item under threat of action against me by eBay.
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>care to explain why if you were interested in the item but the pictures weren't all that clear, why not ask for better pics ? kinda sounds like POSSIBLY... you hoped the bad pics would keep the bidding down, and the item would be better than the pics, >>
I was assured by the buyer that the item was in mint condition. The pics showed "something" going on that might have been artifacts of the photo or similar, and I gave him benefit of the doubt based on his answer. If there was any concern on his part that the photos would cause a lower final price, then he could have posted his answer to my question, or new photos. So indeed, I did expect it would be better than the pics!
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>When you state you'd like either a full refund with a return or a "partial" refund, then YOU are "seeking" control which can be construed as extortion. >>
Saying "I would like to return the item for full refund, or accept a partial refund" gives the seller MORE control than saying "I would like to return the item for full refund".
I find it interesting that my original item #4 has not been brought up. In fact that was the item the seller had the most issue with, not the partial refund request.
http://macrocoins.com
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>
<< <i>When you state you'd like either a full refund with a return or a "partial" refund, then YOU are "seeking" control which can be construed as extortion. >>
Saying "I would like to return the item for full refund, or accept a partial refund" gives the seller MORE control than saying "I would like to return the item for full refund".
I find it interesting that my original item #4 has not been brought up. In fact that was the item the seller had the most issue with, not the partial refund request. >>
That's just as bad as the buyer bringing up a partial refund.
If the seller brings it up, that's fine.
For the buyer to bring either one up..... not classy and I would give the full refund and block the buyer... and I don't block folks easily.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>
<< <i>In the future, I would recommend just opening a SNAD claim with eBay. The seller will be notified,
and will have a fixed length of time to respond. A negotiated settlement won't be out of the question,
but if it's a simple disagreement over the definition of "mint", the buyer (you) will win 100% of the
time. Assuming the seller isn't abusive in that scenario, I wouldn't leave a neg. If he really digs in,
I might leave a "neutral" as a courtesy to future prospective buyers. Assuming I got the refund without
undue hardship, I probably would leave no feedback. >>
Meanwhile even if the seller ends up being right, he still gets dinged because the case was opened in the first place. I've had SNAD cases opened where I could point to the problem the buyer described being stated verbatim in the listing, but I'm dinged as soon as the buyer opens the case instead of just emailing. If the seller won't help and you really think you're right, fine, but outside of egregious fraud, have the courtesy to just email the seller and let him make it right before opening a case. >>
I was under the impression that if the seller issues a full refund, he will not "get dinged".
Perhaps the policy was changed at some point. (?)
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Odd that he would refund you via a new payment as he would get his paypal fees back automatically by using the refund link. >>
He has a low feedback rating (<50) so has not figured these things out yet.
He just gave me an additional payment to cover the fees. I guess he figured it wasn't worth the $63 to go through the back and forth refund.
It seems the consensus is that I should not have asked for partial refund, or for a reduction in another auction, and that it is the seller's prerogative to do those things. So, how would that go? How about the following exchange:
Buyer: The item you sent is in worse condition than you described, and I'd like to return it for refund. Please let me know address to return the item.
Seller: So sorry you're not happy with the item. Can I offer you a partial refund to offset the value difference due to the damage?
Buyer: No, thank you. I just want to return for refund please.
Seller: Perhaps I can give you a discount on another similar item I have for sale?
Buyer: NO! I don't need 2 of them! I WANT MY MONEY BACK!
Is that how it should go? Seems telling the seller the acceptable options up-front makes more sense.
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>
<< <i>Odd that he would refund you via a new payment as he would get his paypal fees back automatically by using the refund link. >>
He has a low feedback rating (<50) so has not figured these things out yet.
He just gave me an additional payment to cover the fees. I guess he figured it wasn't worth the $63 to go through the back and forth refund.
It seems the consensus is that I should not have asked for partial refund, or for a reduction in another auction, and that it is the seller's prerogative to do those things. So, how would that go? How about the following exchange:
Buyer: The item you sent is in worse condition than you described, and I'd like to return it for refund. Please let me know address to return the item.
Seller: So sorry you're not happy with the item. Can I offer you a partial refund to offset the value difference due to the damage?
Buyer: No, thank you. I just want to return for refund please.
Seller: Perhaps I can give you a discount on another similar item I have for sale?
Buyer: NO! I don't need 2 of them! I WANT MY MONEY BACK!
Is that how it should go? Seems telling the seller the acceptable options up-front makes more sense. >>
You can phrase it any way you want to, but as someone stated earlier, requesting a partial refund is goiing to come off in a less than favorable fashion in most cases, particularly since ebay rules already favor the buyer and sellers (and buyers) know this. The truth of the matter is that many people who fish for "partial" refunds have less than justifiable reasons for doing so and are simply taking advantage of an ebay systyem that inherently provides buyers with most of the leverage. I'm not saying you are in that category, but that is the reality of the situation.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
what I'm assuming this was). Someone else bid just slightly less than what you won it for, and
they might be perfectly satisfied with the item. So go ahead and tell the seller you aren't satisfied
and would like to return the item. If the SELLER wants to avoid the hassle of a return and either
a second chance offer to the underbidder or just relisting it, then he can propose a partial refund.
<< <i>I wonder why half the "eBay problem" threads appear to be self induced problems??
Just forget it and never, ever, ever, ask for a "partial refund" for an item which was purchased. It ALWAYS appears like extortion as this is why eBay has a global return policy which buyers can use. >>
I really think that the above sums the whole thing up perfectly.
I have no doubt that your intentions were exactly as stated. Still, 19Lyds sums it up perfectly.
<< <i>He has a low feedback rating (<50) so has not figured these things out yet. He just gave me an additional payment to cover the fees. I guess he figured it wasn't worth the $63 to go through the back and forth refund. It seems the consensus is that I should not have asked for partial refund, or for a reduction in another auction, and that it is the seller's prerogative to do those things. >>
I would be forgiving after he gave the final $63.
Say thanks and move on maybe without giving feedback. In any case I wouldn't neg or neutral after a full refund.
I think that sometimes asking for a partial refund may make sense if an item is described poorly, it saves return shipping (in this case it would also save that $63). The problem is that sellers will probably take it wrong so it's best to only ask for a return and if the seller offers a partial refund then take it or pass.
I had one similar buy, a problem that wasn't mentioned and I asked for a return or partial refund, in reality I preferred a full refund but thought I was being helpful to avoid shipping and time and if I kept it then I would have had to sell it because the problem bothered me. The seller said return it or keep it. I returned it and watched it sell again for a lot less, probably because there was only one other strong bidder the second time around.
<< <i>asking the seller for a refund of 1/3 of what you paid is never going to go over well. if you had any reason to believe the item was not going to be to your liking, ask for more pics. >>
I asked him about the condition, and he reassured me it was mint.
<< <i> the members of this board have the misconception that everything on ebay is an approval sale. if the listing said no returns, why would you NOT ask for better pics ? >>
No returns means the auction is per the description and pics. The description say it was "used but in a new condition". Pic (actually, pic) was inconclusive. Seller reassured me it was mint. It was not.
<< <i>its difficult if not impossible to believe you see something in the pics that you don't like but bid anyway, then you win the item, receive the item, then expect the seller to refund 1/3rd of your money.... >>
I did not expect him to refund the money. I offered that as an option in case he preferred not to accept the item back for full refund. I was being nice.
<< <i>when he doesn't you call it a "fiasco" if its a fiasco its one YOU could have avoided with a simple request for better pics. you don't owe the seller a neg, you owe him a thank you for a lesson that cost you nothing. why "approval" people even use ebay is beyond me unless they just need something to complain about. >>
I did not buy the item on approval. I bought it expecting it to be in mint, new condition per the item description and reassurances from the seller. The "fiasco" part of this was being threatened by the seller when the item did not live up to his words.
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>
<< <i>asking the seller for a refund of 1/3 of what you paid is never going to go over well. if you had any reason to believe the item was not going to be to your liking, ask for more pics. >>
I asked him about the condition, and he reassured me it was mint.
<< <i> the members of this board have the misconception that everything on ebay is an approval sale. if the listing said no returns, why would you NOT ask for better pics ? >>
No returns means the auction is per the description and pics. The description say it was "used but in a new condition". Pic (actually, pic) was inconclusive. Seller reassured me it was mint. It was not.
<< <i>its difficult if not impossible to believe you see something in the pics that you don't like but bid anyway, then you win the item, receive the item, then expect the seller to refund 1/3rd of your money.... >>
I did not expect him to refund the money. I offered that as an option in case he preferred not to accept the item back for full refund. I was being nice.
<< <i>when he doesn't you call it a "fiasco" if its a fiasco its one YOU could have avoided with a simple request for better pics. you don't owe the seller a neg, you owe him a thank you for a lesson that cost you nothing. why "approval" people even use ebay is beyond me unless they just need something to complain about. >>
I did not buy the item on approval. I bought it expecting it to be in mint, new condition per the item description and reassurances from the seller. The "fiasco" part of this was being threatened by the seller when the item did not live up to his words. >>
Problem #1... "used but in a new condition". Huh? What does that even mean? If it's used, it's USED. Not new. Common sense 101, anyone?
Problem #2... Use of the word "mint". Unless it's a) being used as a description of a facility that strikes coins or b) followed by the word "state", in my experience, usage of this term by a seller usually means that they have little/no clue of how to evaluate condition.
Problem #3... Image shows an apparent problem- yet buyer ignores it in lieu of seller saying it's "mint". Why not simply ASK him up front, "I see (whatever flaw) at (location) on the item. Would you please look to see if it exists?" Again, common sense 101.
Problem #4... Asking for a specific amount/percentage partial refund. As a long time eBay seller my gut reaction to requests like this is that the buyer's trying to negotiate a back end discount. Either keep it or return it. Period.
Problem #5... Acknowledging that one is participating in a clearly noted "no-returns auction", but despite #1,2 and 3 above, still feels entitled to a return or partial refund anyway. (I actually blame eBay and PP for this one; seller terms mean nothing anymore thanks to buyer-centric policies...but most buyers would still ignore them regardless. Sigh.)
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>
Problem #1... "used but in a new condition". Huh? What does that even mean? If it's used, it's USED. Not new. Common sense 101, anyone? >>
I don't see the problem. Basically, it means "like new". You can't call a used item "new" if the item is used.
<< <i>Problem #2... Use of the word "mint". Unless it's a) being used as a description of a facility that strikes coins or b) followed by the word "state", in my experience, usage of this term by a seller usually means that they have little/no clue of how to evaluate condition. >>
eBay has a specific definition of "mint", see eBay definition of "mint"
<< <i>Problem #3... Image shows an apparent problem- yet buyer ignores it in lieu of seller saying it's "mint". Why not simply ASK him up front, "I see (whatever flaw) at (location) on the item. Would you please look to see if it exists?" Again, common sense 101.
Problem #4... Asking for a specific amount/percentage partial refund. As a long time eBay seller my gut reaction to requests like this is that the buyer's trying to negotiate a back end discount. Either keep it or return it. Period. >>
I gave him the choice to return it or give a partial refund. I did not try to negotiate at all, just told him what I was willing to accept, and let him decide. I did actually want to keep the item, it just wasn't worth what I paid for it since it was in worse condition than described.
<< <i>Problem #5... Acknowledging that one is participating in a clearly noted "no-returns auction", but despite #1,2 and 3 above, still feels entitled to a return or partial refund anyway. (I actually blame eBay and PP for this one; seller terms mean nothing anymore thanks to buyer-centric policies...but most buyers would still ignore them regardless. Sigh.) >>
A "no-returns auction" relies on an accurate description. If the auction says the item is "like new / mint" but it is used / damaged, the buyer is not expected to accept the item.
http://macrocoins.com
Problem #1... "used but in a new condition". Huh? What does that even mean? If it's used, it's USED. Not new. Common sense 101, anyone?
I don't see the problem. Basically, it means "like new". You can't call a used item "new" if the item is used.
He said "used but in a new condition", not "used but in a like new condition". You however interpreted it as the latter.
Problem #2... Use of the word "mint". Unless it's a) being used as a description of a facility that strikes coins or b) followed by the word "state", in my experience, usage of this term by a seller usually means that they have little/no clue of how to evaluate condition.
eBay has a specific definition of "mint", see eBay definition of "mint"
From your broken link..."SUMMARY: "Mint" means perfect, if the item's not literally in perfect shape, it's not mint." This is a typical eBay one size fits all definition. A used item by definition shows signs of use, thus it cannot be perfect.
Problem #3... Image shows an apparent problem- yet buyer ignores it in lieu of seller saying it's "mint". Why not simply ASK him up front, "I see (whatever flaw) at (location) on the item. Would you please look to see if it exists?" Again, common sense 101.
This was conveniently ignored...perhaps because someone didn't think to ask said question, which would have uncovered the flaws in question, making all of this silly drama unnecessary?
Problem #4... Asking for a specific amount/percentage partial refund. As a long time eBay seller my gut reaction to requests like this is that the buyer's trying to negotiate a back end discount. Either keep it or return it. Period.
I gave him the choice to return it or give a partial refund. I did not try to negotiate at all, just told him what I was willing to accept, and let him decide. I did actually want to keep the item, it just wasn't worth what I paid for it since it was in worse condition than described.
Regardless of your intent, the act of asking for a partial refund is looked upon by many sellers as an after the sale attempt at getting a discount; it happens a lot, and many have given in to such extortion simply to preserve their FB record and DSRs. We have a strict "keep it or return it for a full refund" policy.
Problem #5... Acknowledging that one is participating in a clearly noted "no-returns auction", but despite #1,2 and 3 above, still feels entitled to a return or partial refund anyway. (I actually blame eBay and PP for this one; seller terms mean nothing anymore thanks to buyer-centric policies...but most buyers would still ignore them regardless. Sigh.)
A "no-returns auction" relies on an accurate description. If the auction says the item is "like new / mint" but it is used / damaged, the buyer is not expected to accept the item.
In a normal scenario, a "no returns" auction means just that. No returns, period. You are buying the item AS IS, so you are expected to ask all pertinent questions before bidding and be prepared to own the item once you have bid, as bidding means you agree to the seller's terms. Of course the new and improved eBay has now created a system where buyers have multiple avenues to weasel out of a transaction... thus sellers now need to understand that they are a de facto approval service, and many buyers will gladly take full advantage of it.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>A "no-returns auction" relies on an accurate description. If the auction says the item is "like new / mint" but it is used / damaged, the buyer is not expected to accept the item.
In a normal scenario, a "no returns" auction means just that. No returns, period. You are buying the item AS IS, so you are expected to ask all pertinent questions before bidding and be prepared to own the item once you have bid, as bidding means you agree to the seller's terms. Of course the new and improved eBay has now created a system where sellers have multiple avenues to weasel out of a transaction... thus sellers now need to understand that they are a de facto approval service, and many buyers will gladly take full advantage of it.
Agreed, it is not a good situation for sellers who would attempt to use the "no returns" umbrella to try pulling a fast one.
http://macrocoins.com
At first, I couldn't get past this statement. An item that rarely comes on the market but yet it's condition was a factor in its return.
And secondly, I just don't bother with "no return" auctions. But once in a blue moon, I will try to persuade the seller otherwise. The bask lash of being too picky or wanting high quality. But for the majority of "no return" sellers, I'll respect their position and simply not bother.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i><The item was still usable, and indeed (it) is quite rare in any condition,>
At first, I couldn't get past this statement. An item that rarely comes on the market but yet it's condition was a factor in its return. >>
I don't know why this is surprising. Most any collectible would have the same considerations.
http://macrocoins.com
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>I'd like to thank everyone again for their input in this thread. I started it looking for guidance on whether or not to give a negative to a seller that threatened me when I asked for a refund, but I got a much more varied and interesting response than expected. I hope that I did not offend anyone with my responses, and if so I apologize for that. I certainly learned a few things from both the eBay experience and from the public airing of it, and that was unexpected and welcome. >>
<< <i>
<< <i>A "no-returns auction" relies on an accurate description. If the auction says the item is "like new / mint" but it is used / damaged, the buyer is not expected to accept the item.
In a normal scenario, a "no returns" auction means just that. No returns, period. You are buying the item AS IS, so you are expected to ask all pertinent questions before bidding and be prepared to own the item once you have bid, as bidding means you agree to the seller's terms. Of course the new and improved eBay has now created a system where sellers have multiple avenues to weasel out of a transaction... thus sellers now need to understand that they are a de facto approval service, and many buyers will gladly take full advantage of it.
Agreed, it is not a good situation for sellers who would attempt to use the "no returns" umbrella to try pulling a fast one. >>
Oops...I just corrected my post; it should have read " ...a system where BUYERS have multiple avenues to weasel out of a transaction..." Guess I need to proofread better.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012