Whats wrong with PayPal?

Ahh I hate eBay and now PayPal too!

I got that Nikon camera a while ago and about 2 weeks after getting it and hardly using it, the flash stopped working.. not physical, I think it is software or a chip gone kapoot. Anyway since it was meant to be ‘recently refurbished’ I asked the guy for a refund, he should be able to get it fixed under the refurbishment warranty. He says it doesn’t have a warranty… which shows it was refurbished over 6 months ago.

I filed a claim with PayPal and then sent them my case with quotes from Nikon saying the camera had not been seen by their repair or service departments since 2 years ago when it was entered into the pile of things to be refurbished!

I just got a message from PayPal saying my claim has been denied?!

I mean what the fuk! It was not as described… unless between 6months and 2 years counts as recently refurbished…

On the other hand when someone bought a tone arm from Rob they complained it was not as described which wasn’t true, and paypal took the money back from Rob without even asking for his side of it and he never got the arm back either!

I know you can get some damn good deals on eBay, but IMO the fuk-ups that happen make the only good thing about eBay and PayPal the large selection of stuff available. People hardly look for or sell anything elsewhere these days so you are pretty much forced into using it if you want to buy or sell stuff. People wouldn’t even bother looking in the paper for things these days.

Bah!

 

I had a very similar experience with PayPal. The buyer complained it was not as described (it was apparently not working), made a complaint to PayPal and PayPal allowed the claim (& took money from my account)without proper reference to me (their online automated response system only allows for a miniscule amount of text).

As the item was working when it left me (the item was sold on ebay ~ I have over 360 positive feedback ~ I don't sell faulty goods), I assumed it had beend amaged in transit. I made a claim to Parcelforce, but PayPal told the buyer to send the item back to me before Parcelforce had inspected, thus denying me any possibility of compensation.

As PayPal will point out to you, in their terms and conditions it is the seller's responsibility to have the item delivered in working condition and as described. If the courier loses/drops. etc then tough, it's down to the seller. This of course means that buyers need not take out any insurance. I couldn't believe this, but nonetheless it is true. I believe this to be an unfair condition of contract, but all PayPal users should be aware of this.

Consequently, I no longer use PayPal and I would earnestly suggest to others to close their accounts forthwith.

 

Yep, I'm with you both here, I think paypal is expensive and offers little or no protection particularly for the seller but for the buyer also. I've stopped accepting paypal for any transactions unless they come from abroad. Ebay is still a great way to buy and sell stuff, but the costs/fraudsters/lack of apparent concern of ebay for their users has put me off it recently.

I'm eagerly awaiting a competitor for ebay, as I think it is high time someone offered an alternative......here's hoping!

 

I'm sure Google will be in the market very shortly. Ebay is becoming almost a farce in the hi-fi sections due to the very high number of fraudulent listings; if not addressed properly by ebay this will surely contribute to their downsizing and potential demise.

 

Plain fact is - it's not compulsory to buy or sell anything through Ebay/PayPal. Anyone who chooses to do either should be prepared to accept the downside.

 

'recently refurbished' is open to interpretation.

 

Yep that's right, and you do get more protection with ebay than when you buy through the free-ads etc. The whole thing is built on trust and 99% of my transactions have been entirely trouble free which is great, and I've met some very friendly and accommodating people through it. But they do like to pretend it's safer and more secure than perhaps it is.....

 

That'd be fine if the 'downside' was transparent and obvious, not apparently an unfair terms and conditions clause, buried in the small print of the user conditions, which I doubt if anyone has read and understood in full.

An analogy would be that, whilst it's not compulsory to have an extension built, you may be somewhat annoyed to find out, in the builder's terms and conditions, that windows are not included and mortar is an extra charge. Don't moan though, that's just the downside of using a builder

 

Ebay could solve the problem very easily by not letting 0 rated users from selling, so you have to work up yoru feedback by buying things and being a good and reliable customer then, you will be allowed to sell, seems straightforard to me.

Tenson, did you pay for this on you CC? if you can you not claim from them? Or if you have fully comp contents insurance maybe claim on that.

 

IMO Google could well be the right firm, they of course now do Google pay, but I think the genius would kick in of their search technology would automatically monitor listings and flag likely fraudulent users to the management team. Not sure whether this is possible really but maybe.

 

Maybe Google plan to extend their "Google Base" service into a full auction site?

I think Google is the only company that can take on eBay - call it "gBay" just to rub it in!

 

I hear that they're gonna be doing a online classifieds but an auction site would be great!

 

True, but the law says that items must meet the conditions a normal person would understand from the advert. The advert lead me to believe I was buying a camera that had been used by this person and then refurbished son before sale. As the guy said to me in a private email, he actually bought it as refurbished himself! From what I found out from Nikon that could have been as much as 2 years ago.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7625556080

It actually says 'Condition - Refurbished'. In fact it is refurbished and then USED.

I have asked PayPal why they denied the claim but I doubt I will get anywhere. I guess maybe the guy took all his money out of the account so they can't get it back anyway.

I don't think I can claim on my own insurance.

The fact that PayPal even asked me to provide proof of my claim is a bit odd to me as well, since according to the sale of goods act under the 'reverse burden of proof' within the first 6 months of a sale it is the sellers responsibility to disprove the claim. This applies to second hand goods as well. I also pointed that out to PayPal at the bottom of all my evidence lol.

 

I've just been ripped of on eBay and put in a claim with Paypal, the seller never even responded to the claim so I won by default.

Whoohoo!

Except that the refund was only for the default eBay/Paypal £105 standard protection leaving me out of pocket by £100+. On closing the claim Paypal said that it would make all efforts to get the rest of my money back. Fair enough except the seller has continued trading while my complaint was in and no more money has come my way. Paypal is useful but their protection policies are rubbish.

I also think I may have just been stiffed on another eBay deal where the packaging was crap and the items got damaged. I've decided that I should have just taken a couple of hundred quid out of the bank and handed it out to strangers as that would have been more entertaining and got me to the same place I am now.

Today I received an email from eBay asking if I would fill in a survey about the feedback system. Hmmm what should I tell them?

 

Basically the onus for second hand goods is on the purchaser. Cavet empor.

You should have asked if there was a warrantee, via the eBay email facility. You should have asked how recently serviced.

Paypal had no need to uphold your claim.

Tough but true.

 

The sale of goods act says that second hand goods need to stick to the same rules as new ones, though things like the durability may not be expected to be as good, but that they should be as good as any other model of similar age and price.

It also says that items should match the condition a 'normal person' would understand the advert to mean - not the absolute definition of the words because of things exactly like this where 'recent' is open to interpretation.

I would at least expect with electronic goods that if it says 'recent' it is within the parts and labour warranty of the refurbishment otherwise it is hardly worth saying it was refurbished.

The advert said 'condition - refurbished' and it is not, it is 'condition - used'.

When I mentioned the fact it was not recently refurbished in the PayPal claim thing the seller just ignored it completely and said he wanted me to get Nikon to look at it and say why it went wrong... which was not actually my claim.

It is not the fact the camera broke that ****es me off so much, it is that PayPal are such unfair tits! How come some sellers get completely ripped off by people making stupid claims and then I get ripped off by a PITA seller?

 

Ebay has a few problems, as I've experienced. Thing is, they have millions of units per hour to deal with, so the service is never going to be ideal. So far I've had 92 deals with 3 ****e ones. What else can you do though?

 

Why couldn't I be screwed over on the cheap things? So far it is only the expensive things... a pair of Final ESL, advertising my PMC's and this camera.

 

Tenson the advert said refurbished, anyones understanding of that would be a return because of a fault or second hand.

To be fair the thing worked when you got it, it later developed a problem.

Again, this has nothing to do with paypal, this is Cavet empor mate.

I know how you feel I have been done a few times. IN fact only today I had a 'excellent' condition pair of B&O speakers delivered where one of the cones is knackered (Rear magnet loose) so now I must start all this crap

 

If it said refurbished I expect it to come to me in that condition, not refurbished once in its life and since has been heavily used!

It did work when I got it and I would have had to deal with that if I had not found out from the guy it was not recently refurbished either (hardly surprising it went wrong then). Thats why my claim was that it was not as described, not that it broke down. Having said that, if it was as described where ‘recent’ is within 6 months it could have been fixed under warranty.

I guess it boils down to keeping things simple. If it isn't simple, PayPal don't want to know. I thought it would be easy to ask Nikon when it was refurbished but when the guy cancelled his registration that data was lost so all they could say is when it entered in to their 'graded stock' pile.

Good luck with the speakers. Will the seller not refund you?