Ebay issue

Okay, I bought a sealed OOP LP for quite a few bucks. I receive the LP and side one has a bunch of moon like crater/dimples throughout the entire side (pressing defect). They sound like soft, low frequency ticks, especially noticeable during the many quiet passages on playback.

I asked the seller for a refund or exchange. The seller has 4 more sealed copies of the same LP. Intersting after I bought this copy, the seller raised their price $10...to like $150.00 per copy.

He has basically told me to pound salt....unable to accept an opened previously sealed OOP LP. Why should I get the short ened of the stick here, especially for such an expensive record ?

I gave neg feeback and opened a case against him with ebay. He has 5 more days to respond or I will "escalate" it with ebay and they handle it.

What do you think will happen ? Will I get my money back from ebay (Buyer Protection program), if he fails to refund or exchange ? TIA

 

Get ready to pack it up and send it back with registered/tracked shipping for your refund is my advice. You definitely should receive a refund as it is a flawed product and not your responsibility being a buyer.

 

Some sellers have a "not responsible for the condition of sealed records" caveat to try and prevent any challenges related to defects. Not sure if it works for them, though, as we all know it's not hard for unscrupulous sellers to re-seal albums.

 

If I were the seller; I wouldn't send a refund or accept a return. It was sealed as advertised and he described it to the best of his ability based on its sealed state. I think that qualifies it as a collectable and not something you should expect to be able to open and play.

The only way for him to inspect the vinyl would have been to open it which would have depreciated the value.

If you buy a sealed record; you take your chances with the condition of the vinyl itself. If you wanted a NM copy of the vinyl; why not buy a copy that's already been opened?

It's not his fault the vinyl inside was damaged. Buyer beware.

 

He bought a sealed product that the seller couldn't open to inspect- how is that not the buyer's fault?

If you buy a sealed record; you take your chances with the condition of the vinyl inside. It's hardly the seller's fault if a sealed vintage product is damaged.

 

This guy did...I don't care. An upstadning seller should bear the defect, not the buyer. Happened once before and the seller refunded my money w/o issue.

 

If he put that disclaimer in; and you bid anyway, you really have nothing to be complaining about. Just because one seller was nice enough to refund your money; doesn't mean this one is obligated to (particularly in this case).

If I was the seller; I'd respond to the eBay claim and quote that disclaimer and point out that I listed it in the auction as part of my defense for not refunding your money.

If I was looking to buy a vinyl record to play; I wouldn't buy a sealed one if the auction had that disclaimer unless I didn't mind risking taking a loss on it.

I'd be very surprised if eBay decides in your favor in this case.

 

Leave him bad feedback and move on. You are going to go through more then $10 worth of headaches dealing with it.

 

Note that this was a cutout so hardly constituted a "collectible"....

This must be an epidemic right now. I bought a sealed copy of a Motown rarity "Greetings We're the Monitors". The record had cracks that looked like it was hit with golf ball. Looking closer I found half inch square spots that looked like someone took a nail and and tried to fill in the box with scratches. It was filthy with dust and looked like it had been played 300 times as well. I've never seen a used record that looked so bad.

So, I contacted the seller and was told that he could not believe that I opened a sealed record! Why, it lost half it's value! I told him that very few music enthusiasts buy records to keep as sealed collectables and it's not a wise investment in most cases. He told me that he contacted eBay who told him the same thing - why did I open it? I couldn't believe it. They told him he did not have to take it back either because I opened it. He says not to worry because he insured it. He told me to bring to the post office the next day along with the claim number.

It turns out that he gave me the parcel number and hadn't even started a claim. I complained to him that he wasted my time and gas and he said the Post Office told him that I was supposed to file the claim. I looked at the online claim entry and it says the sender or the recipient can fill it out, but it needed details I didn't have which I had to pry out of the guy. It turns out too that he insured it for less value than I paid for it.

So not only do I have to do his claim entry, he gets to have my money while I have nothing. I have to wait for instructions from the post office to bring it back to them again.

I took some macro photos of the record that show the awful damage. The completed listing says sealed record and this record looked liked it had been through hell. I attached them to the claim too.

I then sent the guy my photos and asked him if that really looked like a sealed album, and I also told him I suspected the post office might see this as fraud if they have an intelligent investigator. He didn't seem concerned at all and in fact just said I should not have opened it.

I am so mad about being victim to this possible deception and losing $20 in the transaction for nothing!

 

If I'm a seller and he left me bad FB based on the fact that I wouldn't accept a return, I'd reply with something along the lines of:

"Buyer did not read the clear return policy of my auction".

 

Definitely give bad feedback - "buyer beware - seller does not care about repeat business!"

 

There is something called "Seller Integrity"...I know an elusive concept to some.

 

"Seller beware- buyer doesn't read or abide by the terms of the auction before bidding".

 

The buyer can add a rebuttal (to which the seller can again reply).

I would add "Seller stuck me with defective merchandise - I'm out $300"

 

But based on the description and the state (sealed); it wasn't defective based on what the seller could tell from the sealed state. It's being sold as a collectable, not something to be opened and played.

The seller specificly stated they were not responsable for the condition of the vinyl record inside the sealed jacket. If he bid anyway; he takes his chances.

 

Who's a buyer going to believe? I believe bad feedback when I see it and avoid those sellers like the plague. Besides, that just alerts the buyer that the seller has no sense of responsibility.

 

Really? A cutout record is sold as a collectible? A record is not to be opened and played?

That's a real stretch for me. I have NEVER been offered that argument before after 45 years of music collecting.

 

His responsablity was to list the item to the best of his ability in its sealed condition; which he did.

 

Just because a record is a cutout doesn't mean it doesn't have value in sealed condition.

Sure; I'll grant you that a sealed cutout isn't anywhere near as desirable as a non-cutout.

But my point still stands about the seller's clearly stated policy.

 

By the way, sellers cannot give buyers bad feedback on eBay - that's been policy for a long time now. Only sellers get bad feedback.

 

and he did...it's up to him to make things right or I will rely on ebay to make it right. If they don't, no matter...at least I tried and his feedback suffered.

 

No one said it did not have value in it's sealed condition. I ask how many people buy an old obscure Monitors album with a huge corner missing for a "collectible"? I've never encountered such a person in my many years of Motown appreciation. It's not really that desirable as a collectible and the value fluctuates too much to be an investment.

 

Why would you bid on a sealed record if you wanted to open it up and play it anyway? That doesn't make sense.

 

He doesn't have to "make things right" because he put the disclaimer clearly in the auction to protect himself from having to deal with returns on sealed items. That's his prerogative. I'd have just stayed away from the auction alltogether.

 

This is a clear case of defective manufacturing and the seller coudn't be expected to know the new sealed item was defective. If there was no disclaimer disclosing the LP is as is and sealed and any risk of manufacturing defect will be at buyer's risk, he should accept a return. If there was no language to that effect then the defective new sealed product needs to be refunded by the seller. Even if the proper language was part of the auction, it is my understanding eBay will find for the buyer, meaning buyer isn't obligated to read or to abide by the terms accepted by buyer. I haven't read this specific auction to know what the terms of sale are so I can't comment on the specific auction but this is not an uncommon issue and buyers always want their money back even if the terms indicate that shouldn't be the case.