Comments on: eBay Seller Sues Buyer for Leaving “Neutral” Feedback

By: ebayscam

ebayscam — Tue, 26 May 2009 15:07:48 +0000

I have just been threatened by an ebay seller that they are suing me “for thousands of dollars,” after leaving TRUTHFUL negative feedback. Here's the story, I was interested in an item, but the shipping was ridiculously high, so before I bid, I requested a cheaper shipping, so the seller offered a cheaper shipping that was satisfactory for me, so I made an offer. The offers and counteroffers went back and forth until we agreed on a price. So when I won, she did not adjust the shipping amount. That's happened before, no big deal, so I asked the seller to adjust the previously agreed upon shipping amount. She refused, so I offered that she could relist the item because of an apparent misunderstanding, but she would not have that either. So I went ahead with the purchase, and to make matters worse the item was flawed. I was still just going to deal with it and just attempt to resell them. But when it came time to leave feedback, I was going to just leave negative feedback, but the ebay feedback site suggests attempting to give the seller an opportunity to make it right first. I thought that was fair. When I contacted the seller, she accused me of lying about the flawed item saying that I was just being difficult because of the whole shipping ordeal. She was very rude and refused to make it right so I filed a complaint through paypal. They ruled in her favor, but I believe it was because it was passed her return time. Regardless of their decision, I still left true negative feedback, describing in truth how the sellers item was and how she treated me. Not to mention that she in the past had also had very bad dealings with other members of ebay. My feedback percentage is 100% and the other members also have very good feedback scores, but this woman is a scam. The same woman accusing to sue me had purchased an item from another ebay member, and for whatever reason wanted to return it, and when she did she returned an empty container. But she got her money back because she printed out a paypal shipping return making it look as if she returned the product. This woman is obviously dishonest and is really going to make people think twice before making purchases from ebay. Who would want to risk purchasing something and then if they are dissatisfied and leave truthful feedback so other people are warned, could have a lawsuit on their hands? I have bought a lot from ebay and everything has always been perfect. I have NEVER dealt with someone like her on ebay, or anywhere else for that matter. So much for the protection and security offered by ebay and paypal.

By: JD

JD — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 19:37:03 +0000

In response to Piper’s post #22: It’s interesting how most of the “problem buyers” sellers are complaining about are turning out to be other sellers. I’ve seen this on the eBay discussion boards too. Someone complains about a buyer and more often than not, the troublesome buyer is a seller, either a competitor or someone who just wanted the item as a one-off to sell and wants to weasel out of paying for it.

Regular ol’ buyers, people who want to buy something for no other reason than to buy and keep it, are the ones being scared off by unethical seller tactics such as this lawsuit. Good luck to eBay trying to control the problem, because it’s been out of control for too long.

By: MB Web Design

MB Web Design — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:48:29 +0000

Can I sue the people who didn’t leave me feedback at all?

By: cashbackatebay

cashbackatebay — Thu, 29 May 2008 14:34:49 +0000

Many sellers lost their perfect feedback scores when eBay set procedure BEFORE policy May 19, 2008 — that’s the day they retroactively counted neutral feedback the same as negative feedback. It was also the day when eBay sellers could no longer leave negative or neutral feedback for their buyers, even for purchases that closed May 18, 2008.

eBay is up to some monkey business! The new policy is drastically reducing eBay PowerSeller status, which means eBay no longer has to pay the promissed PowerSeller discounts. Many of eBay’s top sellers will no longer qualify for the 98% thresholds to maintain their PowerSeller status. Many are speculating that eBay wants to see seller outrage, so that it can do away with the antiquated feedback system and replace it with the Detailed Seller Ratings. Amazon has a similar system and has not had the same turbulence as eBay.

eBay sellers feel one-sided feedback is PATENTLY UNFAIR! eBay’s new policy means a buyer can give a negative or neutral EVEN IF:
>> Buyer never contacts seller for resolution of problem.
>> Buyer doesn’t read description and is dissappointed.
>> Buyer has an unconfirmed and unverified address (and seller is not obligated to ship).
>> Buyer says he never receives item (yet postal records confirm delivery).
>> Buyer doesn’t purchase insurance (and experiences a problem).
>> Buyer pays late or doesn’t pay at all.
>> Buyer has a bad day.

Could eBay be held liable for secondary defamation? eBay attorneys should take another look at possible legal ramifications of the feedback changes. A cyber attorney should look under federal law (the Communications Decency Act) as it may be possible that if eBay censors feedback, eBay may be legally responsible for remarks that members post.

By: ZVM

ZVM — Wed, 28 May 2008 19:51:53 +0000

FOR ‘ps3′. How did you get the post removed with defamation rules, as you say? I am trying to do that too; a buyer said libelous/totally untrue things about me. He’s a whacko but ebay doesn’t care. How can I get the court-order to remove it?

By: PB

PB — Wed, 21 May 2008 18:43:51 +0000

It looks like if you are out of the US, different policies may apply so be careful. I just saw where a seller left negs on 5/20 but the seller was from china and the buyer from mexico.

By: PB

PB — Tue, 20 May 2008 21:20:59 +0000

loks, The policy was started officially on May 19th (yesterday). From what I have read, if you go to leave feedback now, you will be shown the new policy (no negs for buyers) and if you decide to leave a neg for the seller, you are asked questions (have you contacted the seller to resolve the issue, etc). You have to click through all checkpoints before you leave the neg. Hope that helps.

By: wombat

wombat — Tue, 20 May 2008 20:21:55 +0000

loks, In a case like yours negative is ok, I just hate the retaliatory feedback that comes along with that. I believe PB (5/19)is referring to the new Ebay Feedback Policy that went into effect recently. Although I am not sure of the exact date or all the new changes.

By: loks

loks — Tue, 20 May 2008 19:24:36 +0000

thank you..

but sorry..what’s with “after 5/19″..thanks again

By: PB

PB — Tue, 20 May 2008 19:13:01 +0000

Loks, If you can’t resolve the situation with the seller and you leave a negative, I am almost positive he can’t leave you (the buyer) a negative after 5/19–even if the transaction took place before then. Good luck.

By: loks

loks — Tue, 20 May 2008 14:21:33 +0000

here’s my case, i am thinking of leaving a negative comment for a seller..i have 100% rating for all of my ebay transactions..but with the last purchase i have, i am about to leave a negative comment to a seller for selling me an item..say i am buying part 2 but shipped me part 1 (describing it as “part 2″ was an error on his side as he admitted it)..he wants me to return the item and me getting the full refund..but please i live in the island and paid 300% more on the int’l shipping than the cost of the item itself..here’s what..he said lately, about leaving comment..”if you are happy, then i am happy”..does that mean a threat not to leave a negative comment?

By: PB

PB — Tue, 20 May 2008 01:05:43 +0000

This part got left out of the last post:

—
As a matter of policy, McDonald’s sold its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit. Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the skin is burned away down to the muscle/fatty-tissue layer) in two to seven seconds.

By: PB

PB — Tue, 20 May 2008 01:04:49 +0000

Umm, did you read any part of my message? How about this?

What exactly is the point of 180 degree plus coffee? Plus, a company worth countless billions wouldn’t even pay medical bills. What’s up with that? I’d say they got what they deserved.

By: KB

KB — Wed, 07 May 2008 06:13:21 +0000

@ PB:

Really if people are going to order heated coffee, you use some foresight (just as if you ordered a highly heated meal at a restaurant). Let your item cool off rather than “playing with fire” and then crying foul about it later.

By: PB

PB — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 23:19:30 +0000

>>>That’s rediculous. That’s borderline a better story than McDonald’s getting sued for coffee being too hot.<<<

You should read your own link. The McDonald’s suit was anything but frivolous. Here are some facts:

As a matter of policy, McDonald’s sold its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit. Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the skin is burned away down to the muscle/fatty-tissue layer) in two to seven seconds.

McDonald’s admitted that it has known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years—the risk was brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits, to no avail.

McDonald’s admitted that its coffee is “not fit for consumption” when sold because it causes severe scalds if spilled or drunk.
McDonald’s witnesses testified that it did not intend to turn down the heat.

The 79 year-old woman (Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico) was in the passenger seat of her grandson’s car (not driving, as commonly reported) when she was severely burned by McDonald’s coffee in February 1992.

She suffered third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, necessitating hospitalization for eight days, whirlpool treatment for debridement of her wounds, skin grafting, scarring, and disability for more than two years.

The treating physician testified that her injury was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen.

The medical bills were $11,000. She offered to settle the case for $20,000. McDonalds offered her $800, so the case went to court.

The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages. (This amount was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found Liebeck 20 percent at fault in the spill.)
The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, which equals about two days of McDonald’s coffee sales.

The trial court subsequently reduced the punitive award to $480,000—or three times compensatory damages—even though the judge called McDonald’s conduct reckless, callous and willful. Subsequent to remittitur, the parties entered a post-verdict settlement.

Post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the local Albuquerque McDonald’s had dropped to 158 degrees Fahrenheit.

By: BUZZ

BUZZ — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 07:27:58 +0000

This new system is flawed!!!!
If you receive >5% neutral or negative comments in any 90 day period you will be suspended from selling on Ebay for 30 days. If you try and argue your case, they will extend it to 60 days. Now along with being charged more in fees, you can be restricted from even using their site.
I was recently left 8 negative feedbacks from a non paying ebayer. I thought I was protected by the new feedback policy implemented by ebay. Turns out because I filed an unpaid item dispute and they replied “don’t have money to pay for items” it gave them the right to leave me negative feedback. These threw me into the new “bad seller percentage” The feedback was then removed but it still has my account with 21 day hold on paypal money!!
So sellers beware do not leave negative feedback for non paying buyers if you plan on filing a non paid item dispute!
Now I have over 80 auctions that just ended that I have to pay for personally then wait 21 days or until buyer leaves positive feedback>> You would think they would at least allow those funds to be used for click and ship purposes. You would think that would encourage sellers to ship super fast.

By: wombat

wombat — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 23:07:14 +0000

As I do agree with everyone else that this was a frivolous lawsuit, many of you do not understand how Ebay ratings affect a Seller’s account. I have 1100+ positive ratings with 6 negatives and 11 neutrals. What nobody knows is that while neutral ratings are explained to the public as having no effect, Ebay views anything different that positive, as not positive. Even a neutral rating counts the same as a negative to a Seller in Ebay’s eyes. If you receive >5% neutral or negative comments in any 90 day period you will be suspended from selling on Ebay for 30 days. If you try and argue your case, they will extend it to 60 days. Now along with being charged more in fees, you can be restricted from even using their site. Now while I do believe this protects buyers from unscrupulous sellers, it can wrongly persecute honest sellers as well. Of my neutrals and negatives, half of them were in spite, and the other half were by newbies who think they are supposed to examine a .99 cent item with a fine tooth comb and post feedback accordingly. I even had one guy leave me neutral and in his comments he even stated that he has to curb his Ebay purchases due to his impulse buying habits. I am glad this will be reflected in my rating forever. I had another guy buy a radio which I stated was untested due to no power cord and was won for $1.04 and the guy was upset that it did not work. He then threatened to leave negative feedback unless I purchased the stereo manual for him on Ebay (which he conveniently gave me the item number for)and have it mailed to his house. Anyways, sorry for the rant and hopefully more people realize that sellers have to bend over backwards for buyers to avoid feedback woes which ultimately cost the seller more money.

By: Tiffany

Tiffany — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 04:59:20 +0000

I guess customer’s right is minimized everytime…Weird world.

By: Piper

Piper — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 01:17:12 +0000

I did know one seller who had to ditch a whole account with over 500 positive feedbacks after someone (she suspects a competitor, but has no proof) decided to ruin it. All of a sudden, people were bidding on her items and leaving negatives without any good reason. She talked to eBay and they were completely unresponsive, to the point that she decided it would be easier to open a new ID with her sister’s address and a new credit card.

I wouldn’t have blamed her one bit if she had sued. She relied on that income and a string of negatives took that away from her. The person in this story, however, is a nut job.

By: chris kozlik

chris kozlik — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:10:53 +0000

I aggree.