posted on November 28, 2001 06:03:12 AM new
Just so everyone is clear on this one....this was not a drop shipment transaction. The item was shipped from the seller's home.
The concept that a seller "never looked at the item" is just beyond me as a seller myself.
This is not a high volume seller. (IMO) In the last 30 days she's had 30 auctions running, and has none running at this time. Now of course, I have no idea what she did prior to the last 30 days, but her FB is 15 if that helps.
posted on November 28, 2001 06:04:03 AM new
customer is always right IF YOU CAN STAY IN BUSINESS.
i have a customer who claimed to have lived in europe for many years and know the value of certain items,she bot and return and bot all for under 15 dollars,never happy,as she is looking for the el dorado for 15 dollars.
she insisted on doing this as customer is always right,how long do you think a small operator can last if everyone decides to do that??
posted on November 28, 2001 08:39:37 AM new
"Customer is ALWAYS right"
That's a very short term approach with serious long term problems. You're telling buyers to keep acting stupid; keep making the same errors over and over again. As a buyer myself, I'd rather the seller educate me of my error, and not reward me.
Why not teach buyers the right way, and the efficiencies will help bring down costs.
posted on November 28, 2001 09:37:11 AM newYou're telling buyers to keep acting stupid;
And that statement, in a nutshell, perfectly describes the disdain that quickdraw has for "buyers".
Why not teach buyers the right way, and the efficiencies will help bring down costs.
The "right way" is complete honesty in online transactions. Buyers know this, and reputable sellers know this also. As Reamond points out, the venue of online auctions unfortunately lends itself to the proliferation of those two-bit scam artists who use this type of market to cheat and swindle, all the time congratulating themselves on outsmarting their "mark". Unfortunately, this type of activity does have repercussions for those honest sellers who take their seller responsibilities seriously, and with the lack of fraud oversight generally associated with online auctioning, buyers who are burned by these scammers, chalk up their lost money to a lesson learned, and leave the venue never to return.
The "village idiot" is the poster here who advocates the position that a seller is not responsible for the warrantability of the merchandise he sells, insinuating that the buyer is a "sucker" who needs educating. <snort>
posted on November 28, 2001 10:06:42 AM new
I left the seller a neg and here is her response. Gotta love it, just because its cheap I shouldn't expect it to be right??
Complaint : Item defective, seller refuses refund/replacement-had to do chargeback thru Visa
Response by "seller"- Purchased a quality product-cheap. Buyer didn't abide by listed terms of sale
I'm trying to compose a factual calm follow-up to her response.
posted on November 28, 2001 10:11:08 AM new
KatyD you're just a cynic; Burned by one transacion now you're out to save the world.
I'm not out to love my customers, I barely know them. I'm simply making a business transaction- giving them what they want in exchange for money. If they do something stupid that doesn't mean I disdain them, I take them under my arm and educate them. That is the ultimate form of caring.
"The "right way" is complete honesty in online transactions."
Absolutely, be honest to the buyer that he/she made a mistake. Don't sweep it under the rug.
posted on November 28, 2001 02:17:11 PM new
As we have established that Quickdraw29 never heard of WOM until the other day, it is time for lesson #2.
Stating the sale term "as is" does not alone negate WOM in a sale. If the seller makes other claims in the item description that are not true, the Warranty will apply regardless of terms because the "as is" term has been contradicted in other terms. If you state that the item is in perfect condition, and the item is not, the "as is" term will not apply. If you state that the item is "complete" and parts are actually missing, the "as is" term will not apply.
Using the term "as is" does not give the vebdor a license to refuse refunds while making claims that are not true. Using terms such as "new", MIB, etc., can also void the "as is" term, when the condition of the item is not as stated.
Using the terms "as is" or "with defects" would only apply when contradicting terms do not appear in the description.
Refunds for items that are materially not what was described are required as a matter of law, and no terms that the vendor states can circumvent this.
"As is" and "with defects" are not and never were operative to allow vendors to misrepresent or defraud consumers.
posted on November 28, 2001 02:31:15 PM new
Wow, Reamond you sound so smart stating the obvious! However, you are wrong because you forgot to make a sidenote: Fraud has to be proven to negate a return policy. It also doesn't have to be fraud, just deceptive techniques, which is much easier to prove because often there are specific rules of law the seller must follow.
While the title of the Implied Warranty slipped my mind, the definition thereof did not. But it was a good try of you to convince the village idiots otherwise. Wow, Slick Willy, I have to watch you closely!
posted on November 28, 2001 02:42:48 PM new
What it is called not only slipped your mind, your earlier attempts to say that a vendor's terms can supercede the law must have been a slip too.
All facts at law must be proven, unless conceded. It is not a sidenote, but rather a basic principle, but I will include the obvious from now on for your benefit.
posted on November 28, 2001 03:17:36 PM new
Any seller with a feedback rating of 15 who is blaming errors on their "staff" is dishonest and will have a short shelf life on eBay.
posted on November 28, 2001 03:49:51 PM new
Retail stores operate differently than online auctions. Individual Target stores do not set their own prices. An item that is clearanced may be $10 one week, then $5 the next, and $2 the week after, until it is sold. Target might wind up refunding $10 for what is now a $2 item. That is, assuming a simple return for a non-defective item. In the case of a defective item, there is often a manufacturer's warranty so the customer is still covered. Also, the customer has the option of complaining to the manager, which usually works.
Normally, if Target gets a return, they ship it back to their supplier. (Except clearance items.) Target is not out any money, so what's the big deal? The cost of returns is built into the fixed price of the item. In online auctions, however, the buyers set the price. Seller puts up an item for $1, and is obliged to sell at the final price, even if he ends up selling a Corvette for $2. That is the seller's risk. The buyer's risk is knowing that the item might not be exactly what was expected, or as described, etc. I'm not saying that's right or even legal, but practically that is the risk of buying in online auctions. The law of averages says that if you buy 100 mail-order items at below wholesale, you will get burned at least once. It isn't worth the buyer's time to pursue the matter in court.
I am not saying what the seller did was right. But on the other hand, I would NEVER buy in a new seller's "as is - all sales final" auction unless I felt like throwing my money away.
posted on November 28, 2001 04:10:08 PM newTwinsoft wrote: I would NEVER buy in a new seller's "as is - all sales final" auction unless I felt like throwing my money away.
To be honest, I didn't think that a fb of 16 was that "new". I checked the fb before I bid and at that time felt comfortable with the seller. Normally when I've purchased something NIB/NWT I've been thrilled with the outcome.
I think this is just one of those situations where the item was perceived by the seller as perfect, but it was not. They made the mistake of not checking the item out and then wouldn't or didn't want to deal with it.
S
Edited to fix that darn html
[ edited by just4laffs on Nov 28, 2001 04:11 PM ]
posted on November 28, 2001 04:19:56 PM new
why waste time hashing and rehashing this issue-seller claims she is using her buyer id to list this item,so she knows she does not want to list it under her regular seller id,why??
because she knows it is defective and she wants to unload on a sucker buyer,she does not care if sucker buyer negs her,because she uses that id for buying most of the time.
she also told buyer to think less of material side of life after sept 11 incident.
this is a deliberate act.
so buyer,move on .
posted on November 28, 2001 04:23:22 PM new
stopwhining:
I think you misread a post. Seller never said that, I did. I have a buying ID and a selling ID.
posted on November 28, 2001 05:53:16 PM new
Well, sounds like you'll get most of your $ money back. I assume you are going to ship it registered mail? Once it gets back to the seller, I bet they do refund you, b/c they would lose a chargeback case most likely.
And maybe quickdraw and REAMOND can exchange email addresses. I'm sure everyone has had enough of their bickering.
