eBay Failed to Enforce Its 'For Parts' Policy

by: airbrake

Ebay usually will not follow their terms for anything when it comes to Buyers. I have had Buyers file INAD after the time allowed and the Ebay system allows it and follows through. Buyers can leave feedback up to after 45 days after delivery date or, if there is no delivery date, 60 days. Sellers are only allowed 30 days after the transaction even though Ebay rules state up to 90 days.

Ebay's rules almost always favor Buyers as many Sellers have demonstrated here on this forum as well as others.

Ebay is not a fair or level playing field.

by: etectra

" I occasionally sell computer / (redacted) parts that are broken but still useful"

If the parts are broken how are they useful?

Are you selling assembles of parts, or groups of loose parts, whereas some individual parts might be useful and some individual parts might not be useful?

"FOR PARTS / REPAIR "

This implies that all the parts are useful for parts and / or repair and that sounds like a warranty, but who is to say what the skill set of the buyer is or what working parts they need to complete their task? Perhaps the buyer can't repair the broken parts to make them useful and perhaps the unbroken parts that the buyer does not have to repair don't help the buyer fix their problem either. In any case the buyer can pretty much make up what they want.

Perhaps better to list the items as various untested parts sold as is for scrap only and take away any implied warranty that they can use for a specific purpose.

"All items are sold "AS IS" and are without a warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied."

"Any testing of items is disclosed within the listing. If no testing is discussed then no testing was completed. Testing of an item by the seller is not a guarantee as to the continued functionality of a item."

by: etectra

To add to what airbrake said...

It really not matter what eBay claims, because the buyer can overrule eBay by making a claim through their bank, payment processor or credit card.

If the buyer paid using a credit card issue through a bank via PayPal they can file a claim with all three parties and eBay. The last time I checked on PayPal - its been a while - the buyer could make a claim 180 days after the sale.

Well at least its not a postal money order, which can be recalled for up to 2 years after it was issued by USPS.

Never believe anything tells you in print or over the phone. They are compulsive liars.

by: AddyUp

At one time ebay UK had no returns on items sold for parts.

But just like ebay's policy's overrule any sellers terms and condition's, distance selling regulations overruled ebay's.

by: Snapped

OP is talking about glorified switches.  From a simple on off toggle, to a whole memory array that electronically packs in…wait for it…on/off switches.

Depending on what level of complexity, that is, what kind of ARRAY of these switches exists, the value beyond scrap (which requires extraction labor) doesn’t exist.  They have to work.  Their guts intact below the ‘part’ identifier.

Now, if the OP explicitly stated that each of these components, at whatever complexity level existed at the ‘part’ discriminator (and says who what that is unless ALSO referenced), then the buyer has no recourse here.

Doesn’t seem to be the case here though, at least not yet.  Unless both we and (perhaps, though not, ahem, guaranteed) eBay have yet to consider said evidence of same.  Which is missing at present.

So that leaves, ‘as is’, although the ‘parts’ were (apparently) identified as ‘working’, to whatever extent that can be determined.  Or alternately stated to be no more than scrap.  Which doesn’t seem to be the case.

But the problem is, the buyer, bidder, interested speculator, can never be sure of what ‘is’…is, until they can hold it and make it yodel.  Or whatever.  Or discover, to their dismay, no matter how good it looks above the fireplace, it doesn’t even wheeze.

And the point is, it’s up to seller to know and convey that explicitly.  For example, was each included ‘part’ tested?  Was each individually parted ‘part’ tested?  Did you plug Ina desktop and it just hummed and you’re clueless why or what still might salvage?  Say so either way.  

And be careful what choice you list.  The OP doesn’t disclose detail here, but did note they chose for parts/repair, implying working order.  But to what degree?  Meanwhile note this:

“ “… buyers of "as-is" listings will see clear, prominent messaging of "For Parts or Not Working" and…”

See that little bitty two letter discriminator?  “..parts OR Not Working…”.  And notwithstanding chargebacks, nothing elicits less sympathy and attention from eBay than the mere appearance of seller misrepresentation.  As their whim defines it.  And just wait untill AI gets …a hold of….uh oh…

Anyway, from a mere human perspective, holding out for a little more detail seems reasonable here.  Even as this kind of caving to manipulative buyers (when facts say so) by eBay IS a known problem, to coin one of their favorites.  And even if this buyer is indeed a dirtbag lying schemer who seems aided and abbeted by eBay in their malfeasance.  Also not exactly something new there.

And that’s not even the scary part.  Consider, now, all of it happens all at the flip of a switch, or rather, a few billions of ‘em.  Which we can only pray ARE ‘working’.  

by: my2cents

@airbrake
Ebay does allow buyer to file an INAD after the window for it has closed.  But they no longer have any Buyer Protection.  The processing of those claims are between the buyer and the seller, the seller does not have to accept the return, nor are they forced to refund.

The OP however has a very unusual problem and on the face it certainly appears Ebay did not handle this correctly at all.

by: my2cents

@electra
Chargebacks have always been an issue for sellers.  And the rules that the banks operate under have not been updated for decades.  We can't seem to get the attention of the politicians to fix the loopholes in the Consumer laws that allow the banks to give a buyer a full refund AND allow them to keep the product too.

Strangely enough if you were to sue that buyer, it doesn't stand up in court.  The buyer either has to give the seller back the product or the money, but they don't get both.

And this is NOT specific to Ebay.  It happens all over the place on all sites.

by: Andy

eBay has painted itself into a corner with its offshore customer service, staffed by people reading scripts with no idea what eBay is, or how it works. Either the CS people can have zero power to affect anything, in which case their only options are to listen sympathetically and then promise the caller whatever fiction will get them off the phone, or the CS people can have limited override powers, in which case they will inevitably make a wrong decision that violates whatever rule caused the eBay member to want to contact them in the first place.

Contrast that with practically any other large company that employs their own CS people and staffs the service with employees who know what they're talking about. As I've said before (on various topics here), eBay could be so much better, but they're not.

by: spooky

this exact situation happened to me a few years ago. listed an ipad type device untested and I am certain I listed it as parts not working but eBay sided with the buyer on a return