| October 30, 2009 |
Buyer Angry at Seller over eBay's Unpaid-Item Dunning |
| By: Ina Steiner |
| Fri Oct 30 2009 030:29:33 |
To the Editor: It happened already. It probably should have been expected by the powers that be at eBay but as usual they've done little or nothing to prevent the situation. Yesterday I received a communication from a buyer blasting me for filing an Unpaid Item Dispute "prematurely". He had no idea that his payment was due in 3 days, despite the fact that our Terms of Sale clearly state such in the listing and no idea that eBay was actually going to step up and allow is to enforce that rule.
Why should they? eBay has a long history of letting the buyers procrastinate, delay, and other put off payment in any way possible. From the lack of an expeditious unpaid item process to the lack of actual payment information linked to the disputes themselves, buyers were used to being able to simply state payment was sent or utilize the process as a buy it now, pay for it later (in some cases much later) program.
Now when buyers are hit with an unpaid item dispute they immediately blame the sellers for being overzealous. What, if anything, has eBay done to let buyers know that they are now subject to a 3 day rule on payments? Why, oh why, does the responsibility of "educating the buyer" always fall to the sellers?
With all of the changes over the past few years buyers no longer know what to expect and have no clue what the details of the process are because of the changes. We're still battling the ever-popular "money order" issue because buyers have been led to believe that they can simply "ask" us to accept a money order and that we should take them regardless of our policies and procedures.
eBay needs to step up and take responsibility for education its user base on policy changes. Kim
|
Reading AuctionBytes Blog: Buyer Angry at Seller over eBay's Unpaid-Item Dunning |
|
Comments (21) | Leave Comment | Permalink
|