A Warning to all eBay Sellers – Fraudulent Return Requests are on the increase again

 

Are you already an eBay seller, or contemplating becoming one ?

If so, beware, frivolous and fraudulent return requests are on the increase again, and you can expect very little protection against such scams from eBay.

Let me explain the problem….

When you advertise something for sale on eBay, you are required to classify it as ‘New’, ‘Used’, ‘Pre-owned’ or ‘For parts – Not working’. If an item is not obviously defective in some way, most sellers opt for one of the first 3 classes, depending on whether the item has been used or not. In most cases, provided you have set your starting price at a reasonable level, the item will receive one or more offers or bids at auction, will then sell, and eBay sends the proceeds to your nominated bank account (minus their 15% selling fee, of course!). You then send the item to your buyer.

All well and good, you might think, so where’s the problem ?

Unfortunately there are a number of potential pitfalls in the selling process, including one big one which derives from the way eBay assesses so-called ‘Return Requests’.

If you are an eBay buyer, under the much-trumpeted eBay’ money-back guarantee’ you are entitled to request permission to return an item to your seller, even if the seller has placed a ‘No Returns’ flag on the advert. If you do put in a return request, eBay will open a ‘Case’ and will first ask why you want to return the item.

If you select a reply option along the lines of ‘I’ve changed my mind’ or ‘I don’t like the colour’, etc. you are, quite reasonably, expected to pay for the return postage. Although the seller can refuse to accept a return which the buyer has justified on these grounds, most sellers normally do accept the return, since no serious seller relishes dissatisfied customers or the adverse feedback they often generate.

Being put in this quandary is in itself unfair to the seller, who will have already forked out a significant amount of money for postage to get the item to you in the first place (ca £3.00 at least, unless they’re brave enough to risk sending the item by untracked Royal Mail 2^nd Class letter post..and it's actually arrived!), and they won’t get this back. 

But there's worse yet to come for the unfortunate seller…

If the buyer claims that the item is ‘defective’, ‘faulty’ or just ‘not as advertised’ (whether this claim is true or not) eBay will automatically award postage costs to the buyer. 

eBay’s decision-making system for assessing return requests is by its nature opaque, but given the speed at whic adjudications appear must be entirely electronic. More importantly, it provides no opportunity for the seller to query the arbitrary decision it makes at the time. There is no evidence that the reasons given by the buyer are reviewed by a human assessor, as they should be in each case, or are indeed validated in any way, before a decision is made.

eBay’s ‘Ask the Community’ online mentoring  system freely admits this defect – the following is a direct quote from a reply dated 24.1.24. It was sent as advice to an aggrieved seller who had advertised an item as ‘Parts Only - Not Working’ and had a buyer’s claim for a full refund on grounds of 'not as specified' upheld by eBay:

”.. If the buyer reports that the item isn't as described, then eBay's position is that the buyer is right. eBay haven't seen the item before you posted it nor have they seen what the buyer received, so the buyer gets benefit of doubt.”

Neither is it possible, as it once was, for the seller to ‘speak to a human’ yourself to offer additional information in the wake of an adverse return request, since eBay customer services no longer offer a manned phone helpline service. (This is a good example of one of the many ways in which so-called ‘AI’ is being foisted upon us for their own convenience by ‘Big Tech’ – usually to our disadvantage).

Even if your advert wording includes detailed explanation of the item and any minor defects it might have, this won’t override any category requirement which stipulates the item must be ‘fully functional’, and thus the buyer’s assertion will still stand. Worse still, as the example quoted above suggests, advertising as ‘Parts Only - Not Working’ won’t protect you from frivolous claims either, since ‘the buyer is always right’.

The only alternative to a full refund with return postage costs options that you as a seller are offered by eBay’s ‘adjudication’ system at the time is to agree to an immediate full refund and let the buyer keep the item outright. 

This will at least then save you the return postage. This means that your ‘buyer’ gets the item effectively for nothing, and you’ve lost both the residual  value of the item and the initial postage cost. The buyer is then, of course, able to sell the same item on in another marketplace (or even on eBay!) and benefit from the proceeds. 

This is technically fraud, which is a criminal offence, and is effectively facilitated by eBay’s faulty assessment system. As far as I'm aware, it has so far not been challenged in the courts; I suspec it's unlikely to be, given the international nature of Big Tech. and the cost of court action.

If you do insist on the item being returned to you as the seller, you will also have to pay for the return postage and supply the buyer with a pre-paid label. You are then landed with an item you may not be able to re-sell, and may even have been altered or damaged by the buyer themselves, or while in transit, for which you have little possibility of redress. (Beware that this is eBay's default option if you don't respond to the request within a set time period, and it can prove very expensive.)

In any other judicial case (e.g. a civil or criminal court) you as ‘the defendant’ would get a right of reply and the opportunity to plead your case before any verdict was given. This is denied you under eBay’s current system which thus demonstrates a strong bias in favour of the buyer. The only opportunity you get to query the ‘decision’ eBay makes is after the Case has been closed, and a full refund has already been given to the buyer. The procedure for doing this is reported to be complex and rarely successful, which is a deterrent in itself. If you try to get help via eBay’s ‘Seller Help’ pages, a blank space is displayed after the ‘Here’s how’ message with no link to follow (see Fig. 1). I suspect that, if queried in the courts, this strategy on eBay’s part would at least qualify as an ‘unfair practice’ and could even constitute a technical denial of a seller’s legal rights.

Unfortunately some of the more unscrupulous buyers are now well aware of this loophole and ‘try it on’ by putting a frivolous, or even downright fraudulent, request stating the item is faulty when it isn’t. These individuals bank on the fact that the high cost of return postage will deter the seller from going to the trouble of asking for the item to be returned, and take the easy option of letting them keep it for nothing. This applies particularly to low value items, where the postage cost (currently £3.35 for an eBay label in UK) may actually exceed the item’s resale value when eBay fees are taken into account.

Sellers beware…..

What can sellers do about it ?

Unfortunately, precious little as things stand…..

For anyone who actually wants to continue using eBay as their sales platform in the light of these revelations, the only possible defence against this excessive bias in favour of buyers’ interests is to advertise their item in the last category I quoted i.e. ‘For Parts Only - Not Working’. This may at least provide some deterrent to would-be fraudsters claiming outright that an item 'doesn't work'. 

As indicated above, you will need to appeal the initial decision against you, and there is no guarantee that eBay will find in your favour even then, since a buyer could find another frivolous reason for it being ‘defective’ or ‘not as advertised’ to defend their claim. The lengthy appeals process is also well-nigh impossible to penetrate for the 'layman'. Another downside to advertising as ‘Parts Only’  is that it does significantly reduce the amount you’re likely to get at auction, and thus renders the whole process of selling small items pretty unattractive  when fees are taken into account.

As a regular eBay seller myself in the past, I have noticed this type of return request is sadly on the increase again, presumably at least partly due to the cost of living crisis forcing some into this type of petty crime.

Why have eBay introduced this policy ?

eBay's income stream depends on charging sellers fees - buyers pay nothing other than the up-front advertised cost of the item, and postage if it's included. Sellers pay a basic 15% fee, with other extras for premium features. You would think, therefore that a business dependent on income from their sellers would want to 'keep them sweet' by defending their interests, particularly at a time when competition by free online sales sites is burgeoning. The only explanation for eBay's buyer bias is that they are determined to maintain their prized 'Money Back Guarantee' at all costs. They see this as their only real advantage over competitor sites, and assume the cost of living crisis will keep desperate sellers on board however badly they treat them.  If so, they may come to regret their decision if aggrieved sellers start to desert them in numbers when things improve.

Final thoughts and some advice

Over recent years I have used eBay extensively to recycle unused items to avoid sending them to landfill. Most items were of relatively low resale value. Having become thoroughly discouraged by eBay’s anti-seller bias, I recently decided on the basis of several similar experiences to wind-down my own eBay sales. 

I will not be returning unless I see policy towards sellers improve. I'm sad that it's become necessary to do this, since it will reduce the extent of my recycling efforts. The risk of being out of pocket, the hassle involved, and the disappointment in being forced to part with a once cherished article for nothing, is simply no longer worth it. 

I would encourage any existing or prospective eBay sellers to think carefully about placing an ad in future, especially if they plan to advertise their item as ‘Used’ or ‘Pre-Owned’.

Always check your wording and imagery carefully before publishing your ad to ensure that it is 100% accurate and reflects what you are actually selling.  Beware of making any claims in your wording that a buyer could dispute and ensure your wording covers any flaws or minor defects (whether or not you classify the item as ‘Parts Only’). This may help deter fraudulent claimants. If you are selling as 'Parts Only', avoid saying anything in your description that a buyer could use against you.

Before posting, put yourself in the position of an unscrupulous buyer, and ask yourself the question ‘what could I use to ‘pick holes’ in my ad’s wording to justify a fraudulent return request if I needed to ?’. 

Although statistics on fraudulent eBay claims are difficult to come by (for obvious reasons), a seller should expect at least 1 in 20 sales to throw up one of these claims - be prepared to see this frequency increase with time if you do continue selling as the 'epidemic' develops.

The only other thing a seller can do after a case is closed, given the impenetrability of the appeals system (see Fig 1), is to provide negative feedback detailing the reasons why they think eBay’s judgement was erroneous. This needs to be done before the case is closed,  though, since eBay disallows adverse feedback on buyers once they have closed a Case. Beware also of the ridiculously low 200 character limit allowed for your complaint. 

I would encourage every affected seller to follow up an adverse experience in this way – it's only by doing so in numbers, that we will persuade eBay to take any notice.

It is to be hoped that eBay will eventually realise that it will suffer a significant seller exodus if it continues to exhibit its current bias in favour of buyers. As discussed, it's sellers that generate fee income for eBay, and without enough of them, there will eventually be no buyers – or fees! 

Take Home Message

I would encourage anyone wanting an easy sales experience to think carefully before using eBay in future. In short - if you have any doubts, choose another sales platform....

For those brave enough to continue selling, I would encourage you to petition eBay to change their system, such that it is fairer to the seller and allows buyer’s return requests to be queried by the seller before coming to a decision. This will at least give you the chance to help redress the balance and make life easier for yourself as a seller in future.

Sadly though, I don’t hold out much hope of an improvement for sellers any time soon, though….eBay are only interested in maximising their income and will continue their current policy as long as they don't see this as threatened. They will also be relying on the after-effects of the cost of living crisis to maintain a vigorous second hand market.

Apart from any issues of bias,  the deterrent effect of eBay's returns policies on recycling is also an environmental issue which should be addressed by government and industry regulators in the light of our commitment to net zero by 2050. Let's hope the next government 'bite the bullet' and clamp down on  bad behaviour of this sort by international Big Tech.

Please share this post with others in your social circle who already sell, or are likely sell on eBay in future.

Figure 1: Seller ‘Help’ information display on Appealing a Returns decision after Case Closure

Version date 14.5.24