eBay bike for sale pulled - Thoughts on this please

[Bonefishblues]

Thanks folks for your input. I went as I felt obliged and lucky for me the sale was genuine.

The sale was only "genuine", if he paid eBay a commission for advertising his bike which we are all presuming he didn't.

Otherwise it was unlawful conduct, you were both in breach of contract, and you(s) defrauded eBay of up to £135.

I expect so - they'll build a margin in for fraud, I suspect

No, it becomes a premium that all of the honest buyers and sellers have to pay. Like the millions they spend on fighting fraud.

That'll be the margin I referenced then

[home]

I'm not judging - I've never bypassed the eBay system as a buyer or seller, but I have made several Paypal transactions as "Gift" when they were nothing of the sort.

Is shoplifting OK as long as you only do it from a big company? Housebreaking as long as it's only a rich person?

Certainly, lots of kids around my way feel the same way when it comes to looting JD Sports for new trainers ...


I don't know how Paypal works out. The big thing is there's no buyer protection that way, if things go wrong. I'd guess that's mostly what you're paying for, a kind of consumer insurance.

Paypal do their own gouging but it's mostly on any foreign exchange type transactions, e.g. cross border, multiple currencies, where they charge a commission AND have really crappy exchange rates.

I don't know why they would offer "friends and family" payments for free, unless it was some kind of banking regulations thing, i.e. they're not allowed to by the FCA. They're not a bank per se but, historically, changed the game and established new rules. If someone genuinely knows, I'd be interested to know.

How do their trader commissions compare to credit and debit card service providers?

FWIW, their buyer protection is worth paying for when dealing with complete strangers far away.

[home]

That'll be the margin I referenced then

Try editing out the double quotes to leave just the relevent part.

Makes it hard to follow threads if you don't. Thanks.

[PH]

I'm not judging - I've never bypassed the eBay system as a buyer or seller, but I have made several Paypal transactions as "Gift" when they were nothing of the sort.

Is shoplifting OK as long as you only do it from a big company? Housebreaking as long as it's only a rich person?

As I said I'm not judging, I'm not in a position to even if I were.
It isn't quite the same as shoplifting though is it? I've deprived a corporation of a fee, rather than a product. Breaching their terms rather than committing a criminal act. You can draw your own line of course.

[Bonefishblues]

That'll be the margin I referenced then

Try editing out the double quotes to leave just the relevent part.

Makes it hard to follow threads if you don't. Thanks.

Welcome to the Forum, and well done on your multi-quoting by the way, good work, although it makes it harder to edit out just the bit one wants to respond to, particularly whilst doing it surreptitiously on a confcall

[Biospace]

What is the position with respect to a contract with eBay if a seller advertises the item elsewhere and sells through that channel before anyone buys through eBay?

[home]

I guess there's three questions;

• a) if it genuine, i.e. not between ebayer users,
  b) if it's a workaround, e.g. "elsewhere" is referred to or listed in the auction, and
  c) what are eBay going to do about the latter?

• a) It's acceptable, just end the auction as "item no longer for sale". It's not an exclusive agreement like selling a house via some estate agents,
  b) as discussed above, and
  c) probably nothing, even if someone reports you. How else would they know?

There's a super secret equation as to how many "defaults" per month your account can have before eBay does anything, and no one really knows what it is. It seems to be WAY too many times though, especially for non-buying bidders, those attracting negative feedback's etc.

But, it's all very random as I wrote above, one guy I was selling an expensive item to got blocked just for trying to set up a viewing before purchase. They also have slightly different rules for expensive, complex items like property or cars, e.g. you don't have to buy after winning.

For the most part, the eBay contract and "binding agreement" is worth nothing, and if a problem arises, they will do everything to block you from taking legal action, even not following the law themselves, e.g. refusing to provide the other party's contact details to start legal action, telling you total crap like you need to have a law enforcement officer ask for it from them (even when it's not criminal).

You can work around that, however, but you need to be able to quote the law to them. They want you to just give up, move on, let the scumbags get away with it so they keep buying on eBay where eBay still makes a commission.

[Biospace]

Buying and selling of cars is mentioned above, it's perhaps worth reminding people there is zero protection from eBay (or PayPal, I think) if you buy a motor car and it's not as described.

[home]

Strange, isn't it. Very inconsistent. Mostly done for the sake of "complicity", i.e. they covering their own asses rather than looking after yours. Boats is another woolly category seemingly not covered by the non-binding agreement cars benefit from, but what's the difference? It's a shell with an engine in it. Loads of non-paying bidders,

As a side note, saw this one today on a Chinese add for a bicycle saddle. Sort of poetic in its own Taoist way.

[Airsporter1st]

Paypal take the money from your credit card or bank - your choice. If you opt for the former, you gain a second layer of protection.

[simonineaston]

Consider two transactions:
T1. buyer becomes aware of (second-hand) bike for sale, meets vendor, closely inspects bike and concludes transaction. Later on, bike develops an unseen fault, buyer fixes it and life continues...
T2. as above, however, buyer meets vendor, gives bike cursory inspection, reliant instead on protection built-in to sundry financial services and concludes transaction. Later on, bike turns out to have fault overlooked on purchase. and so becomes unusable. Buyer seeks recompense from financial services with mixed satisfaction - life drags on unhappily.
Which transaction is "better"? I will argue that T2 represents a trend that denies humans the opportunity to carry out traditional face-to-face interactions and leads, ultimately, to a denial of responsibility such that no-one is responsible for their own actions and all can attempt to deny any direct involvement. Hence Grenfell etc. etc.... be careful what you wish for, folks!

[home]

buyer meets vendor, gives bike cursory inspection

I'd suspect it's more about eBay falling within, and having to conform to, a few different, already existing consumer laws, e.g. especially relating to distance selling. "Compliancy" to them (i.e. having to do enough so that THEY (eBay/Arden/Paypal etc) don't get sued, is the problem they have to navigate through.

It's what I, others, & even the police found when trying to deal with the online fraud rings, that eBay would not do anything unless they were legally forced to do so. They did the minimum to avoid themselves being sued/charged.

I still find that where, e.g. you might want to take the seller to a small claims court. Unless you know which laws to quote, they'll block you from prodiving the seller's contact details.

Person to person you can sign a bill of sale/contract and it's a done deal ... "sold as seen" (& you're screwed) ... but who has ever done that for a bicycle? Some protections need to built in when buying unseen & at a distance which eBay enables & we have all benefited from. That part, & most of humanity, are wonderful. I guess, like many of you, I've done deals in both directions all around the world in countries I've not seen, never mind for objects I've not seen. Often for £100s.

Would I or they have done them without some kind of safeguard? Probably not.

It's a shame really because I'm just old enough to remember when products were sold "on approval" (i.e. sent out prior to payment) which, incidentally, still actually happens in Japan today. Sellers send stuff out, you check it, then go to the local supermarket to pay for it. And people do. Imagine how that would work in our wonderful, multi-cultural society?

Ditto, if I was buying anything from China, sure as hell I want my British consumer legal rights. "Fit for purpose" doesn't seem to translate into Mandarin, unless you realise that "the purpose" is reaping foreign currency, not what the object is supposed to do.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
I have brought many items from China via eBay.
Generally I'm very happy no different as if I would buying from a shop in this country.
Tell me everybody is happy buying from retailers on the High Street and have a satisfactory service?

Never fear of those people who fear from those people overseas doing them, a lot of the China businesses have dried up on eBay anyway.

if items are not as described or they are damaged defective et cetera, even if they're secondhand, I've not had any problems that I couldn't handle or the seller didn't cough up on the full amount without having to return the item or they gave me a discount which I was happy with/ ebay refunded me and even told me I could keep the goods without returning them.

But of course I don't deal with expensive antiques /Designer clothes.

You can always buy off Amazon, I've no idea why because they're simply more expensive for when you go there there is nil stock.

people have told me they've had a bad experience in the supermarket and will never go back there again to that firm.
If you feel the same about Ebay and their policies then maybe you should adopt that method.

There are many stories on this post some good some bad.
The decision is yours.

[Biospace]

people have told me they've had a bad experience in the supermarket and will never go back there again to that firm.
If you feel the same about Ebay and their policies then maybe you should adopt that method.

There are many stories on this post some good some bad.
The decision is yours.

People are generally decent, a recent-ish purchase of a MacBook on eBay was borderline acceptable when it arrived, cosmetically. I couldn't decide whether the partial description and pics was intentionally misleading, it was sluggish which I'd expected given how it had been configured but flew once set up properly and with £30 of solid state 'hard drive' installed. The purchase price was not excessive.

It continued perfectly, until after a month a couple of keys dislodged without any provocation, which set me thinking again. Had someone not been computer literate and practical, it could have been a very disappointing purchase. I emailed the seller, suggesting if I advertised it honestly to sell, I'd likely only be able to recoup 90% of the price paid, but that I was happy with it and it was working well, once sorted. I didn't ask for any money in recompense, but 20% of what I paid pinged through later that morning, complete with an apology. The item was still in the period when feedback could be given, so whether or not there would have been the same response once this period had ended is anyone's guess. I would like to think so.

People's problem with eBay is that it is a monopoly on selling online using couriers and has carefully protected this status so it can charge what it likes, all the while paying so little tax on its huge UK revenues, that in itself this is a news story.

You'd have thought Government would by now have done more to reduce the different standards it uses for high street and online shopping, but not a bit of it. If anything, the Twitters, Facebooks, Amazons and eBays of this world seem to control Government behaviour - I suppose civil servants drool at the volume of data held on every one of us who uses the online platform. If Asda prices go too high, competition works to prevent excessive profiteering as people go to Sainsbury's or Aldi. When eBay does the same, people cannot go elsewhere.

[fastpedaller]

Consider two transactions:
T1. buyer becomes aware of (second-hand) bike for sale, meets vendor, closely inspects bike and concludes transaction. Later on, bike develops an unseen fault, buyer fixes it and life continues...
T2. as above, however, buyer meets vendor, gives bike cursory inspection, reliant instead on protection built-in to sundry financial services and concludes transaction. Later on, bike turns out to have fault overlooked on purchase. and so becomes unusable. Buyer seeks recompense from financial services with mixed satisfaction - life drags on unhappily.
Which transaction is "better"? I will argue that T2 represents a trend that denies humans the opportunity to carry out traditional face-to-face interactions and leads, ultimately, to a denial of responsibility such that no-one is responsible for their own actions and all can attempt to deny any direct involvement. Hence Grenfell etc. etc.... be careful what you wish for, folks!

I believe you are correct...... I've always said "when you buy a house you get less guarantee than when you buy a box of matches"