Dismiss Notice
We are making some updates and reconfigurations to our server. Apologies for any downtime or slow forum loading now or within the next week or so. Thanks!

eBay Transaction Issue: Can I Get a SHF Consensus Decision?

Discussion in 'Marketplace Discussions' started by ROFLnaked, Jul 13, 2021.

  1. ROFLnaked

    ROFLnaked Forum Resident Thread Starter


    Not music-related, but I am curious to know the opinions of my SHF brethren on this one.

    I recently purchased a pair of higher-end, lightly-used wingtip shoes as a buy-it-now on the popular auction site. They looked to be in good shape, the price seemed ok, though I was ultimately pushed to hit the buy-it-now button by the presence of the factory shoe trees in the photos (which alone sell for $50 on the manufacturer's website).

    The shoes arrived, though sans shoe trees. Weird. I looked back at the auction to see if I missed a disclaimer, but no: it was the standard two-sentence, "Lightly-used, and the photos tell the story" description. I emailed the seller, who appears to deal primarily in shoes. He was amiable enough in his response, but he said that they hold onto the shoe trees for use in their ads. I replied that I wished they'd have mentioned that, because it influenced my purchase decision. He came back to thank me for pointing this out; that they will make a disclaimer going forward that shoe trees are not included in the auctions.

    From those of you with more experience, does this qualify as SNAD? I don't love the shoes in person--the photos were complimentary to say the least--and if not for the shoe tree discrepancy, I would chalk it up to winning some/losing some in life. I thought I recalled having seen in the eBay rules something to the effect of any accessories pictured along with the item for sale/auction is considered part of the auction unless stated otherwise, as photos are considered part of the description, though I am not seeing it now while briefly perusing their site.

    Do I have recourse here for filing a SNAD complaint and returning the item on the seller's dime if he's not amenable to including the trees?

    Thank you.
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2021
  2. Combination

    Combination Forum Resident

    New Orleans

    Just out of curiosity, how much do shoe trees cost on their own?
  3. ROFLnaked

    ROFLnaked Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Per the website of this particular manufacturer: $50. To clarify, the shoe trees pictured in the auction were made by the manufacturer of the shoes pictured, and they sell for $50 on the manufacturer’s website by themselves.
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2021
  4. I wouldn’t have expected the shoe tree, it’s kinda like when I purchase an LP on eBay I don’t expect the table it’s sitting on to be included in the sale.
    AaronW, Reese, tmtomh and 2 others like this.
  5. captouch

    captouch Forum Resident

    Bay Area, CA
    I would say if this manufacturer’s shoes routinely comes with shoe trees, you might have a case because it’s part of the original contents. If not, then it can be argued they’re being used for display purposes (a pair that’s used and has creases or are bent a bit can be made to look newer if stretched by a shoe tree) and not included.
    tmtomh likes this.
  6. MikeMusic

    MikeMusic Forum Resident

    Surrey, England
    I've caught myself out on occasions like this
    I'd put it down to experience and

    Trust No One !
  7. Roland Stone

    Roland Stone Offending Member

    My two cents: If the shoe tree was a deciding factor, you should have confirmed with an E-mail first.

    However, I would have the opposite opinion if these particular shoes were typically sold with shoe trees included.
    AaronW and tmtomh like this.
  8. ROFLnaked

    ROFLnaked Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Point taken. I read through the ad, and somehow it didn't occur to me that they wouldn't have been included, but yes; you're right that I should have emailed for clarification. I have had other instances where I have sent a question on a buy-it-now item, only to have someone else buy it before I got the response--that's not the case here though, because again, it didn't register to me that they wouldn't be included.

    Not a huge deal either way, but I will either go "Karen" on him (as my young daughter says) and push for a significantly-not-as-described return, or I will flip them and likely lose $30-$50 on selling price differential/fees. Maybe when I get home from work this evening I will read through eBay's terms and see exactly what the policy is for accessories included in the photos. As someone above mentioned, a buyer naturally would not expect a turntable to be included along with a record.
    captouch likes this.
  9. captouch

    captouch Forum Resident

    Bay Area, CA
    Kudos for trying to have an open mind about it. If the seller is friendly and responsive, maybe just say you really thought the shoe tree was part of the package and since it isn’t, you’d really like return them and are willing to pay return shipping on your dime (or are okay in receiving a refund minus return shipping cost). This will put the ball back in his court and he may accept that or if he has a ton of shoe trees, maybe he sends you one because it’s of little consequence to him.

    If he gets all rude or doesn’t respond, maybe you choose to push the case, but there may be a middle ground that will work short of it being all or nothing for one of you.
    Shawn and eddiel like this.
  10. Combination

    Combination Forum Resident

    New Orleans

    You honestly didn't wonder if it was too good to be true?
  11. R. Totale

    R. Totale The Voice of Reason

    You bought shoes, not shoe trees. If the shoes themselves are as described and you don't want them you can still return them, you will just have to pay return shipping.
    tmtomh and Shawn like this.
  12. eddiel

    eddiel Forum Resident

    Toronto, Canada
    The seller indicated that the photos tell the story and the shoe trees were part of the photo. If you made a claim on eBay they'd likely back you.

    Up to you if you want to pursue it but I wouldn't concern yourself too much whether the consensus on here is in support of a claim or not. We're just a bunch of back seat moralists at the end of the day and not everyone is going to agree with you. :)
    Dave, ROFLnaked and Shawn like this.
  13. kwadguy

    kwadguy Senior Member

    Cambridge, MA
    Yes, this is a SNAD case, and you'll win, no question. The shoe tree was in the photo, and, without a disclaimer, it was reasonable to assume that it was included--ESPECIALLY since the seller said: "the photos tell the story." It's not like you saw something in the background of the photo and thought that might be included. It was a shoe tree that, presumably, was in the shoe.

    File a case. Don't give it a second thought. If the seller is pleasant through the return process, leave them OK feedback. If they are not, leave negative feedback once you have your refund. Do not ever mention the word feedback in ANY communication with the seller.

    Oh, and the seller pays return shipping. It was their screw up. eBay will force them to pay return shipping, no matter what it says in their listing.

    You did not have an obligation to clarify before buying. The seller had the obligation to clarify in their listing. "The picture tells the story" suggests whatever you see in the picture is included.

    I say all this as someone who sells a lot more than buys on eBay. I have on rare occasions made a mistake in my listing (neglected to note a physical defect in the sealing plastic for a collectible record, for example). If so, and the buyer complains, I eat it. Because I screwed up.
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2021
    Reese, joachim.ritter and ROFLnaked like this.
  14. ROFLnaked

    ROFLnaked Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Thank you Kwadguy—

    Not because you’re telling me what I’m hoping to hear, but because you’re interpreting the situation in accordance with eBay’s official policy. This was exactly the info I was hoping for.
  15. Whoopycat

    Whoopycat Forum Resident

    Des Moines
    I think a little more context is needed... were the shoes displayed in a factory box with the shoe trees inside? If not, it's a bit of a slippery slope argument.

    "I'd like to keep this amplifier, but you didn't include the audio rack the amp was photographed on."
  16. Spitfire

    Spitfire Senior Member

    Pacific Northwest
    How was the ad titled?
  17. Joseph.McClure

    Joseph.McClure Forum Resident

    Memphis, TN
    Shawn likes this.

Share This Page