Discogs seller refuses to help

In one case of my selling a sealed copy of Sonic Seasonings double-LP by Walter Carlos (that I had acquired a few years earlier), there was a store price sticker adhered to the front. You could tell the sticker wasn't new. I'd always stored it upright, but of course there was no guarantee of the actual condition of the LPs. Perhaps good luck entered into equation because the buyer gave me positive feedback for the transaction.

I have another copy of the same title with a blue, circular (CBS) company-issued sticker "Two-Record Set / Special Low Price", which I would trust to lend itself to being an authentic issue.

If I ever do advertise it for sale, I will most certainly put in the caveat that it is unopened and that the buyer assumes the risk involved. I hate being this way but, but jeez.

 

And again, if paid with Paypal their ruling on returns will override any "no returns" language from the seller. Don't want to accept returns, don't accept Paypal.

 

I don’t find anything that you said unreasonable. My major point is really that there should be a Sealed grading category for the media where it’s well understood that the media is unknown and ungraded, because that’s all it can ever be. Actually, some online stores do have that category, but unfortunately Discogs and eBay don’t allow for this.

IF that category existed, and a seller STILL chose to grade the media as Mint, then it’s on them to guarantee that the media is in fact Mint.

But in the absence of that category, the norm has been to grade media as Mint. As a seller, you’d be penalizing yourself if you chose the Poor category to cover all contingencies. Many times, either in the ad copy or in separate Seller Terms verbiage (which Discogs makes you click a checkbox to acknowledge agreement to before buying), some sellers will be explicit and say they can’t guarantee condition of sealed media and no returns are accepted on sealed items that are opened by buyer. All that seems clear enough IMO and should be sufficient as an agreement between buyer and seller.

Despite such disclaimers and T’s and C’s being in place, an eBay or PP will likely still refund a seller on the claim of a non-Mint record inside, whether that claim is true or not.

That to me seems like a flaw in these entities unfailingly favoring one side over the other, despite best efforts to have a clear understanding of the conditions of sale that prospective buyers can reject as unacceptable before pulling the trigger to buy.

 

Buyers are more important than sellers for eBay, Amazon and Discogs.

And in general the buyer is the weaker partner in the deal.

Legal situation in Europe is basically the same as eBay, Amazon and Discogs policies in this field.

 

Here is one of my worst experiences on Discogs happening now:

Seller (we'll call them Nancy Buddy) has an item that I've been looking for my final keeper copy. Nancy Buddy grades it NM/NM. It's not priced too high either. Then I look at their feedback. Over 90 negatives and most are about overgrading. Then there's about 170 neutrals. Phew. Well, I figure if they're putting it at NM, it will at least be a high VG+. I ask them to check it over before sending it out. I mention I've bought it 3 times and I want a final keeper copy. They do and they send it out.

It arrives in two slabs of cardboard taken off a big box with a giant hole on one side showing there's a record inside. I open it and it's more along a VG with the jacket having all corners bumped and plenty of fading (it's a 50 year old album). The album has lots (LOTS) of little marks and plays with a hiss. There is also a note saying if I'm not happy about it, let them know and mark the box as refused and give back to the PO. I look up that 'refusing an item' and from what I understand is you can't do that if something has been opened.

I contact them and say this isn't a copy I need. They say to return it and they'll send a refund. I ask them for a label and they ask if I don't trust them. My reply is I do not since they have so much negative feedback. I decide it's just too much of a hassle to send it back. They do say they'll send a partial refund in exchange for positive feedback. I do agree to that. They reply they will send back $7 AFTER I leave positive feedback. The album was $25. After shipping and taxes it was over $30. I decide to just leave negative feedback instead. I'd rather others know about the overgrading and poor packaging.

Nancy doesn't like this. Nancy decides to leave negative feedback for me on my Buyer Feedback (not as just a reply on the feedback I left them). Nancy says I intended to buy just to leave negative feedback and that I'm "unusual". Here's hoping the Lords of Discogs see I have 100% feedback both as a seller and buyer and will take that off. Here's the kicker for me: Nancy says she is going to take legal representation against me.

 

nancy blew it by offering to basically sell you positive feedback. if that was sent via the transaction messages, discogs will remove the retaliatory feedback, no problem. you just gotta ask 'em to review.

also: what a weirdo

 

I'm all for dumping on bad sellers and this is certainly one of them. If you're honest with yourself, all the obvious warning signs were nevertheless ignored and an order was still submitted with this dishonest creep.

Just my opinion but that's just begging for trouble.

Hope Discogs will make it right and even *suspend* that seller. Her behavior is outrageous and attempts to bypass the rating system. Yikes!

 

Yes, I saw the warning signs. As mentioned, I figured it would have to be a nice copy at a NM/NM grading. If it would have been a decent VG+, I would have been fine since I saw they are known for overgrading.

Apparently she is a he. Someone messaged me on Discogs that they had a similar issue with him. I never took any money but it's there in the messages that Nancy wanted to buy positive feedback. After bringing up that legal action, I made sure to state that I never took any refund and my feedback for Nancy was for the good of other buyers.

 

So here's my case with a discogs purchase (NM/NM from a UK seller with100% feedback and no apparent overgrading report either).
I contacted the seller asking for a discount which he could not offer and bla bla, then eventually we agreed that he would not use tracked and signed shipping to save up at least on postage.
He said " I could send International Standard and the rate would then be £8 but you would have to take liability for any loss or damage.
In all honesty I have only had one parcel going missing and that was to Mexico, so one of hundreds is very low %.
If you want to order with std shipping I can adjust price if you place the order and leave shipping blank for me to edit. Sorry but this is the best that I can suggest."

I responded with "Fair enough. I think I will accept the 8£ shipping. I know that it is impossible to beat this shipping from UK! "

Item arrived today and both the package and reocord are warped, and also the grading of the cover is more on the Vg+ region.

So I sent them a message:
"Record was delivered this morning.
Unluckily there are a few problems.
Package was warped, and so is the record.
Plus the Cover is starting to ring wear, has some white stains, some warpage (cause of the package) and corner wear.
Impossible to justify this record as NM/NM
Here some pictures (and 1 video):
Dropbox - allegati.zip - Simplify your life
Can provide more upon request.
Please advice"

he said
"sorry to hear this from you. The record was sold as NM-/NM- which it was when sent. I have sold hundreds of records and not had one issue with description from any buyer, you can see this all feedback is superb. The issue I see is it was damaged in transit, you showed the bent package and say the record is warped. I have a record flattener machine so if any record is warped they get flattened. It looks like it took some rough handling in transit why I always post tracked and signed to cover against any possible damage, you asked for a cheaper cost service. We agreed to post standard at your liability for loss or damage. If you had paid the extra for cover then I could have claimed from the postal service, because there was no cover I can't claim. I am sorry to say that I can do nothing and suggest that in future you pay the extra for cover, you are the only customer out of hundreds who does not accept this extra cost for piece of mind. Regards"

I just wrote him this and currently waiting
I am sorrier than you.
I just wished I received a good record. I am a quick payer, and I have had no dispute so far on discogs or ebay as well.
So what you are saying is that paying for non tracking also impacts on the way you pack your record?
Your description stated "posted in card mailer with stiffeners " even before agreeing on shipping.
You are entitled to your opinion, I will not argue.
So I am with what I received.
So, just to be clear I understand, I am contacting you in good faith for an overgraded item and you do not offer return or any other solution?
Thank You,


Given that I tend to believe they are in good faith, still I think that his packaging was inadequate.
Dropbox - allegati.zip - Simplify your life
Only really takes so much to warp that thin cardboard. I noticed as soon as I got it in my hands.
I appreciate your imput on what you would do if you were me.
I do not intend to argue, just to the right thing.

 

You get what you pay for. No guarantees means just that.

 

since when does paying for economy shipping justify an over graded & under packed record?

 

While I understand your frustration, the pic I see shows the package was mishandled by the shipping carrier which is not the responsibility of the seller. Had you opted for insurance, he could put a claim on your behalf and work towards a resolution. Shipping is expensive and it is tempting to forgo insurance but typically, the cheaper the shipping fees, the longer the package will be in transit, and therefore the more opportunities there are for it to be damaged in the process. As an aside, what gives you the impression it was not packed properly? He used cardboard, didn't he?

Secondly, the warp you're referring to is quite minor. I've had far worse outside warps from perfectly new properly stored records. You can either buy a Vinyl Flat and put a bunch of heavy books on the jacket of the record which will flatten that section of it over weeks/months. Basically, this is fixable quickly for a fee and for free with patience and time.

As for the jacket, you might have a case that it was overgraded but in light of the context of this situation, I doubt you'd have much to go on in regards to obtaining any sort of partial refund.

Since he has a vinyl flattening device, you could always opt to return it for a full refund but would need to subscribe/activate PayPal's return shipping program to be refunded the return shipping fees.

 

Thanks everyone for commenting.

I'll be as short as you I actually paid for NM/NM which is not what I received.

My feeling exactly.
Record I am sure warped because of packaging.
Sleeve is overgraded no question. We can debate if it's vg+ or a notch more (ex).
Never an NM for me.

Cardboard is not sturdy enough IMHO and actually feels very flimsy. It really takes a firm touch with your thumb and point finger to bent it.
What causes a bit of frustration is that I think that with just a tad more consideration warpage could be avoided.

I do understand that he can't claim. I am not fully sure whether this justifies a mediocre packaging.
To an extreme: Had it shipped "amazon style" without any package at all, could he be saying the same?
If not, where is the limit?
Just saying for the sake of discussion.

I don't understand this. If it's over graded, it's over graded, isn't it?
Btw I will play it and decide if I can live with it.
I just think that if I paid for a vg+ I would have a different feeling.

Having said that, what would you do?