Ebay Seller Note In Package

From what I understand, sellers are put through the ringer on payments for goods. I tried to buy a high priced item a few weeks ago (not philatelic items), sent the seller payment using goods/services options. As soon as he received, he said paypal noted that they would not release the funds until shipping tracking showed the item was delivered. Very risky from sellers perspective and they backed out and refunded. The seller wanted me to do a friends/family payment, which was a no-go for me since I didn't know the guy and would have no purchase protection that way.

Wringer indeed. I recently sold a stamp on ebay and was "penalized" (as I see it) by having to wait for my money because — get this — I hadn't sold anything in a while. For as little sense as that might make, that's the reason ebay cited.

Didn't matter that I've been with ebay since their very beginning and that I have a perfect feedback record. As far as ebay was concerned, no $$ was coming my way until the buyer indicated that the item was received. On top of that, ebay said they needed to verify my bank account by sending test deposits, and that it was up to me to tell them that the amounts were received before payment could move forward.

So apparently, ebay feels that if a seller has long spells between sales, the seller develops a certain degree of untrustworthiness and thus needs to be re-verified. I'm sure they see it differently, but then again the administrative mindset at ebay is hopelessly intractable.

Compounding the issue was that I didn't sent the item using ebay's in-house shipping postal shipping options, so ebay had no hooks into sending and receiving information: the tracking number. Their online chat help suggested I manually enter the tracking number, but guess what? That part of their system was buggy and wouldn't accept the number after multiple tries over several days.

Sigh... So yes, "wringer" indeed.

OK, off my soapbox now.

Sorry about that, but it's unlikely a feeling nor a mindset. They have machine learning models trained on historical transactions, and data scientists, telling them that your circumstances predict a high rate of item not received claims and chargeback experiences. All big data companies are using ML models now to tell us and them what to do.

Mostly yes. I occasionally send money to our developer in Portugal and I believe I pay for the conversion.

+1, this is most likely metrics driven. For a seller account that hasn't been active in a long time to all of a sudden start selling again, could be perceived as potential fraud.

Imagine the mindset that would interpret such metrics in that way. "Hasn't sold in a long time... Hmmm... Well, they must be dodgy." But if that's the mindset, why would they let me post anything for sale until I was re-verified? Instead, they allowed me to post items for sale that a complete stranger later ponies up money for. Payment required at time of sale, so the buyer is now out his money. Ebay's playbook says it's OK to take possession of their funds, all the while perpetrating a rouse of getting the seller to prove themselves as "legitimate" before relinquishing it. But proving legitimacy, honesty, whatever you want to call it, was never a concern when I posted my items for sale. And testing a bank account to see if deposits arrive has no logical connection to proving legitimacy, honest, etc. Who would be stupid enough to sell things on ebay and not have the means to collect the funds?

Anyway, I thought I was off my soapbox but apparently not. See what you started? LOL

eBay transitioned to managed payments some time ago.
The fund-holding policy is specified in the user agreement.

In the old days, one way that sellers could avoid refunds, despite
eBay policy, was to run a shell game with bank accounts. Make a big
sale, get the funds, close the associated bank account, and repeat.

Imagine yourself as a buyer of a large lot. Your seller refuses to
refund the return. Since they have previously closed the associated
account (after they got the funds - they transferred the funds to
another account known only to the seller). The only remedy in this
situation leaves eBay (or the buyer if the buyer protection is denied!)
holding the bag - and the only sanction for the seller is losing their eBay account.

With managed payments, it is almost impossible to do this.

So, in a way, you can blame previous dodgy sellers for today's delays
in payouts. I'm just thinking out loud here, but perhaps this had
an impact on the initiation of managed payments, with the associated
holds on payment?!

John

If eBay charges close to 15% in fees and I buy $100 worth of stamps on eBay from a seller with free shipping, other than being thoughtful, what is the benefit/incentive/self-interest of that seller to deal privately with me and sell the same stamps to me directly for $85?

You're assuming the buyer gets all of the benefits of the fee savings rather than the more likely scenario where buyer and seller would split the savings, i.e., they would sell to you at $92.

Alternatively (or additionally), the buyer would save by not having to pay sales tax, which in certain states can approach 10% or more.

I am not recommending or defending this route, but it's been known to happen. People will try to find ways to circumvent taxes and other fees.

I agree that a (legitimate) seller who is looking to avoid running transactions through ebay in order to save fees isn't intending to pass along all of those savings to the buyer. In fact, I'd be extra nervous about a seller who was willing to pass along all of the savings in this circumstance, because I'd start to think that their play isn't for the $7.50, or the $15, but the $85.

I'm curious about how this would work for you. Using this example, how are you determining what $100 of value looks like, when you have a seller who claims no knowledge of stamps? How are things being lotted up and priced?

Unless you live in a minority state which does not require sales tax collection on internet purchases, you forgot that you save that way. That said, a seller should not be expected to pass on their entire saving to you for normal mail order transactions. However if they do, be aware that what they are avoiding is future taxation as well as cost to calculate proper taxation on the money you pay by check, due to the fact your payments are not included in a PayPal (or similar) 1099.

There is nothing wrong with that action when one considers that the sale does not successfully conclude until the item is delivered and found to be acceptable to the buyer. Until then PayPal is still guaranteeing the transaction. If PayPal releases the money too soon, PayPay has no way of clawing back the money if the seller drained their account. PayPal is this way protecting the buyer and PayPal as well as helping the seller with fraudulent buyers when such are identified.

That said, I still do business with sellers in the Ukraine paying with PayPal. My last three orders arrived yesterday (why they were mailed separately I don't know but my guess is the bigger the package the greater the chance of theft. However, when I buy from my seller in the Ukraine, which were seller prewar, I figure they will get their money even if the material never arrives here because I will never complain. For me that becomes my personal donation to support folks in the Ukraine. For the record, I have received all of my purchases. Now my tax dollars going to Ukraine, that is a very different matter and much more amplified by the revaluations of the FTX failure and fraud.

Edited to change unintended strike-through to intended underline.

Agree, but the seller was going to have none of that as the perception was he wasn't getting paid before the item was shipped. For a $3k item, it's understandable to be cautious. While I was in my right to decline a friends/family payment, he was also right to be worried he wouldn't get paid if something went wrong with the shipping.

Actually, the seller was not right - technically.




This is from the "holds" policy in the eBay help area.

If you are a seller, and this policy is not satisfactory for you, you should not sell high priced items on the platform.

John