Ebay issue

Exactly!
I've been on eBay since 2000,
and in all that time I've only left...
1 NEG for a buyer who refused to pay &
1 Neutral for a seller that I didn't get an invoice from.
The neutral was my first eBay purchase.
Sometimes I had to wait a bit,
but everything worked out in the end.
It just takes patients

Darryl

 

I just learned that the claim was approved. I am going to be reimbursed for the total price paid, including the postal charges. The check is in the mail and I still have the crappy record in hand. Apparently this seller knows that the post office will now automatically pay the claims without truly inspecting the items. So, everyone, start shrink wrapping your beat up oldies and sell them on eBay. Just be sure to throw a golf ball at the record before you pack it. Soon, the taxpayers will be your source of income. Thanks everyone for paying for my record! I do appreciate it.

So, what does a conscientious buyer do in this circumstance? I find it difficult to assume the best about the seller. I am really inclined to leave bad feedback just to warn others. I think I would want others to do the same. What do you think? I was really inconvenienced and stressed by it. At this point, I am still too ticked off to write objective feedback.

 

Leave him bad feedback so that others know in the future.

 

What about leaving Neutral feedback?

Darryl

 

Actually the seller won big time. Not only did he part with a beat up record, he also got my money plus 8 dollars postage & insurance. I was reimbursed my money plus the 8 dollars by the US Postal Service. In effect, the seller took the money from the public using me in the process. Of course, there is a remote possibility that he was innocent. But he certainly did not care when I told him the post office may not agree that this was mail damage!

 

The seller of my Monitors LP has got 722 feedbacks in total, none of which are negative or even neutral in the past year. He's not a high volume guy and appears to sell collectibles or pawn shop items and hardly any records. He was likely ripped off himself by this record. I think the best thing to do is not give any feedback at all.

 

I'm rolling my eyes because your philosophy is pretty unfair and you're all gung-ho trying to defend it. My point was that the policies are in place to be used when it's appropriate to do so. In a case (let's just forget these examples, because honestly I'm not even sure which one we're talking about anymore) where a buyer wins/purchases a sealed out of print LP, the buyer has to be reasonable. And in being reasonable, they would realize that it is unfair to open the record, and expect a refund from the seller for any defects. I can't believe that you'd disagree with this, after putting yourself in the seller's shoes. Think about it from the seller's position once. If you still keep your stance after doing that, then... well, I'll be speechless.

 

I've avoided problems like this (as a buyer) by emailing the seller beforehand and asking what he or she would do if I opened it and found it was a re-seal or defective...

I buy collectible records...but I buy them to play, so I open them and I play them. That's all up front.

On reseals: I've seen a few cut-out reseals (over the hole) -- most of the time they were so cheap and were still in NM that I didn't bother with returns/complaints.

On higher ticket reseals, I've returned or negotiated a price reduction. On a couple of occasions, the seller simply refunded my money and let me keep the records.

I guess it's the luck of the draw on getting ethical sellers. I've been lucky I guess.

Dale

 

Perhaps you lost track of what really occurred? Or, are you mixing up the OP's record with my record? Did you look at the pictures of the Monitors LP? The record had been played hundreds of times, half-square inch areas were scratched as if someone was trying to fill in a box, and huge cracks were made and not by the post office. The cracks had grunge filling them so these were not recent breaks and the shipping box itself was perfectly intact with pleny of cushion. The cutout hole was sealed over. Clearly someone, possibly the seller, has tried to pass a worthless record off as an unused sealed record. And, even worse, the seller ripped off the post office by claiming that they caused the damage. Clearly the post office had nothing to do with it yet the taxpayers paid for it. I don't think that sellers should make their living off the taxpayer's back. Which part of this acceptable to you? Is it ok for a seller to rip off buyers selling fraudulent items? Or, is it ok that the neither the seller nor the buyer took a loss, only the post office and indirectly, everyone? I don't understand how anyone can condone anything about this transaction, and I suspect you would feel quite differently if you were sold the fraudulent item. Speechless if fine with me btw. I blame all of this on Ayn Rand.

 

Ok, this is the original post:

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.

Now. You defended this, didn't you? And I'm saying that's borderline ridiculous. If a seller is obviously scamming you, then you're in the right, and by all means file a claim with eBay or whatever. But if you crack open an out of print sealed LP and there are conventional defects...that's how it goes, and you should accept it, and not try to make up for your inconvenience by using eBay's policies. Not fair to the seller...at all

 

I bought as described sacd. Got it and it wasn't sacd. Told the buyer and they said sent it back and we will refund plus shipping. Did that. 2 weeks nothing. Sent and e-mail on what was up. No reply. Sent another, no reply. Now it's been 3 weeks. Went thru e-bay and filed. They told me to explain to the seller and just give them a chance. 7 days latter I got a refund without a response from seller. Since I did get a refund I gave a Neutral and said, Did a dispute with e-bay for refund. Seller never responed to my refund e-mails

 

I have had several incidents with ebay purchases. The most effective way I have found to deal with the problem, is to go to paypal, and open an "item is not as described claim" I have won every time. Don't let ebay get involved if you can avoid it. It just complicates the process.

 

go to know for the next time if it happens. This particular issue is now in the hands of Ebay. We shall see what happens...

 

Success !

partial response from ebay resolution.

Bad seller's beware !

 

Congrats a successful outcome for you.

 

Just curious if you would have persued the full refund had the seller not had any extra sealed copies of the same LP? I sold 5 AP 45 rpm sealed reissues from the first Fantasy set last month and I can't say it would have been my responsibility had there been pressing issues with any of them. These are all out of print and even AcousticSounds doesn't have them available. I've also gambled and purchased sealed reissues off Ebay knowing that if I were to get a dud I'd be stuck with it. That's why I almost always stick to open play graded vinyl unless something comes up as a stellar bargain.

I did not have duplicates of any of them aside from the opened copies which were my listening copies.

It makes me hesitant to sell any more sealed vinyl on Ebay if their resolution center is going to treat individual sellers like distributors or retail stores. I guess I will stick to Audiogon for selling my remaining sealed ones...

 

Who are you addressing? I am not the OP. There are two different posters describing problems in this thread. Or, perhaps you do feel that the taxpayer should foot the bill for the fraudulent record? The seller won big time while everyone else pays, albeit a very amount. Again.....I did not post about the record with pressing defects. I described a problem with a very used and beat-up record being passed off as an unused sealed LP. I think the problem is that I piggy-backed my problem into the OP's thread.

But, regarding an eBay sealed item with conventional defects, the buyer seldom loses in disputes when they go to Paypal and/or eBay. It may be borderline ridiculous, but eBay and Paypal established and implemented that policy, not me. Your argument is with those giants, not me.

 

It should be noted that said record was by Simply Vinyl...A sealed simply vinyl lp is in a vinyl envelope with a flap that is sealed closed with a gold sticker. All of the simply vinyl LP's I have received in the past, the gold sticker ripped when I tried to pry it off. I'm sure if I worked very carefully, I could open the flap w/o cutting the seal. In this case, the seal readily popped off, indicating to me that it had been opened and inspected. It did not appear to have been played back however. Bottom line, the seller probably saw the defect and tried to pass it off. Now I will be made whole and the seller will proably try to pass the returned record off to another unsuspecting buyer who may not have the ballz to call the seller out on it.

 

I understand it's generally the case, but again that doesn't make it the right thing to do just because you can do it. My argument isn't with the policies. It is with people who are abusing them. Those policies are in place and they help a great deal of people. However, if so inclined, people can definitely take advantage of a seller. Again, if the seller and the record sold to you is obviously shady, then by all means use the policies accordingly.

 

Are U sugesstion that that I am abusing them ? I've spent over $16K in vinyl on Ebay since march. Every trans has been 100% save for this Dous....

 

I don't know. This thread has been so long and I forget what people have said and which situation we've been talking about.

Bottom line: If you feel you have the right to get a refund from a seller for a sealed LP that you opened, that ends up having pressing defects of some kind, you are incorrect and being unreasonable.

I'm not saying that's how you feel. But that is my stance on that issue. It seemed people had that attitude throughout this thread. Honestly it's so long and I don't want to re-read the whole thing. I hope this works out for you.

 

It's worked out. A bad seller has been corrected. Life is good.

 

That's one possible seller's bottom line. Another (and I am and am speaking as a seller) is that if somebody buys something from me and aren't happy with what they got, they get a full refund including postage both ways, because I don't want anyone to be unhappy with business we conducted. This has sometimes cost me money and I don't like that, but I suck it up. You get 100% satisfaction or it costs you nothing, end of story.

The buyer's bottom line is that he wants good value for his money spent. An unplayable record doesn't represent good value.

 

While this is true, the seller is not at fault for this, and I feel that the buyer should understand all of what is at stake before purchasing sealed LP's.

 

Purchasing sealed LPs online is tricky business due to the potential for unscrupulous sellers to reseal records. I try only to purchase sealed LPs from sellers with an established history/feedback. If the LP has some kind of factory sticker or price tag from an established retailer on the shrink wrap, I have a greater confidence level that I am purchasing the real deal.