I am right or have I gone mad?

[A Harris]

The tag I'm, talking about is basted on - it is not a permanent tag.

 

[compfi]

Is Amex buyer protection better/different than normal chargeback procedures elsewhere? If so, I will begin to use Amex for my ebay transactions.

Originally Posted by tiecollector

This is where Amex comes in handy, the buyer protection is really good. Whatever might have been questionable with the NWT deal, the fact that he is calculating the 7 days from your purchase of the item and not your receipt of the item is shady, I would call your cc company and make him pay for the suit (which you'll probably get to keep).

 

[drizzt3117]

Originally Posted by compfi

Is Amex buyer protection better/different than normal chargeback procedures elsewhere? If so, I will begin to use Amex for my ebay transactions.

Amex favors the buyer in almost all cases.

 

[sjmin209]

Here is eBay's official definition of "new with tags," as specified under the "condition" tab on the selling page of clothing auctions. Note that the tags in question are the retail (i.e. price) tags, and not fabric labels, size labels, brand labels, etc., that may be affixed to the jacket.

"Please indicate the condition of your apparel item by selecting whether it is 'new with tags' or 'new without tags'. To be listed as 'new with tags', items must be brand new, never worn, with the original retail tag(s) still attached. If the item is brand new, never worn but does not have original retail tag(s) then please select 'new without tags'. For all other conditions, please select 'other' and type in the condition of your item."

Plain and simple: if the price tag has been removed, or if the clothing has been altered in any way, it's not new with tags. This is not, as some duplicitous sellers would have you believe, open to interpretation.

You can (and should) file a complaint with eBay about this misrepresentation. If you paid by Paypal, file a complaint with them, and they will refund your money. If you used a credit card, file a complaint with the company as well.

 

[munkyboi]

obviously, if the tag had been removed and the suit had been altered and the pants had been hemmed, it's not NWT. you mentioned that the ebay listing stated that the suit/pants had been altered, that actually was a clear indication that the suit is not brand new regardless the tag issue. the seller misrepresented the item, but you should not have bidded the item knowing that it had been altered (not brand new). as many had said, dispute the charges would be the way to go. good luck.

 

[compfi]

Thank you very much. I was wondering if there was an official definition of "new with tags". I will include this in the dispute form.

Originally Posted by sjmin209

Here is eBay's official definition of "new with tags," as specified under the "condition" tab on the selling page of clothing auctions. Note that the tags in question are the retail (i.e. price) tags, and not fabric labels, size labels, brand labels, etc., that may be affixed to the jacket.

"Please indicate the condition of your apparel item by selecting whether it is 'new with tags' or 'new without tags'. To be listed as 'new with tags', items must be brand new, never worn, with the original retail tag(s) still attached. If the item is brand new, never worn but does not have original retail tag(s) then please select 'new without tags'. For all other conditions, please select 'other' and type in the condition of your item."

Plain and simple: if the price tag has been removed, or if the clothing has been altered in any way, it's not new with tags. This is not, as some duplicitous sellers would have you believe, open to interpretation.

You can (and should) file a complaint with eBay about this misrepresentation. If you paid by Paypal, file a complaint with them, and they will refund your money. If you used a credit card, file a complaint with the company as well.

 

[compfi]

You are right, especially given the definition of NWT by ebay from a reply above. My understanding is that sometimes someone buys a suit, has it altered, and decides not to keep it. It's never been worn and the tags have never been removed. I thought that was I was bidding on.

Originally Posted by munkyboi

obviously, if the tag had been removed and the suit had been altered and the pants had been hemmed, it's not NWT. you mentioned that the ebay listing stated that the suit/pants had been altered, that actually was a clear indication that the suit is not brand new regardless the tag issue. the seller misrepresented the item, but you should not have bidded the item knowing that it had been altered (not brand new). as many had said, dispute the charges would be the way to go. good luck.

 

[BrettChaotix]

I think you are 100% in the right. He refused delivery but you have that documented to cover your back. Charge back on your card and give him a negative rating on ebay. Then post his info here, on Sufu and any other forums. Hopefully he'll get banned from ebay soon enough.

 

[compfi]

OK, just to provide an update... Chase's dispute process went in my favor. As some have guessed, I have my money back AND the suit. The seller paintersam has been a complete ass during the entire process. There were additional exchanges where he continued to lie and change his story, contradicting earlier claims he made, trying to wiggle out of the refund. I just wanted the refund and was not out to get the suit as a freebie, but I have to admit that I'm a bit happy that I've essentially been compensated by paintersam for the hassle. Now, its the feedback game. If I leave neg feedback, so will he. I have some items to sell and don't want the strike on my record, so I think I will have to wait until I'm done selling before posting the negative feedback.

 

[sjmin209]

Compfi--Did you pay by Paypal? If so, the story may not be over. If you file a chargeback with Paypal, they often come back later and open a dispute through their own service. You'll keep the money, but you may have to prove to them that you tried to return the suit (i.e. by furnishing a tracking number).

 

[compfi]

Thanks for letting me know. I have the tracking info. I will definitely hold onto all relevent documentation.

I was curious how this works, so maybe you know the answer. If the dispute with CC goes in my favor, then the chargeback is with Paypal and not the seller, correct? Then it is up to paypal to try to collect from the seller. What does paypal do if the seller has nothing in their account?

 

[VMan]

You are going to return the suit, correct?

 

[sjmin209]

Originally Posted by compfi

Thanks for letting me know. I have the tracking info. I will definitely hold onto all relevent documentation.

I was curious how this works, so maybe you know the answer. If the dispute with CC goes in my favor, then the chargeback is with Paypal and not the seller, correct? Then it is up to paypal to try to collect from the seller. What does paypal do if the seller has nothing in their account?

Technically, yes, the chargeback is with Paypal. After the chargeback goes through, they will open up a claim in their internal system (as they would if you disputed the charge directly with them). You probably won't have to do anything, as the creit card company should have furnished them with all the available info. I'm not clear on what happens if the selelr has nothing in their account--they may be able to take the money directly from their bank account.

In any case, they may ask you to return the jacket again, or to return it to them, if the seller won't accept it. It's good that you've held onto all hte info.--sometimes this is the only way to protect yourself.

 

[compfi]

I already paid once to try to return the suit. I don't even feel it's right that I had to pay out of pocket to send it back since the seller's description was false. He refused delivery and was dishonest, rude, and arrogant (to put it mildly) throughout the whole process. I've spent a bare minimum of 5 hours communicating with him, with the credit card company, putting together all of my documentation, and dealing with this. I would be very hesitant to return the suit again without at the extreme minimum being paid for the shipping I've already incurred plus the additional shipping.

I can't imagine I would return it unless required to do so by paypal. The seller did everything in his power to screw me. I'm not about to go out of my way to make him whole. Whatever I would get for the suit by selling it would come nowhere near the value of the headache I've incurred thus far.

I'm curious, how many people here would voluntarily return the suit again at this point? If so, under what conditions?

Originally Posted by VMan

You are going to return the suit, correct?

 

[VMan]

Well, though the item was misrepresented, you can't keep both your money and the suit - that would be dishonest. The seller was an asshole, but I'd still return it. Hard to say though - I'd feel like keeping it since he was such a prick all along, and doesn't seem to want it back.

I'd request that the seller give you your money back for both shipping charges since the item was so grossly misrepresented, and then send the suit back when he does so. Maybe a small credit for your time, as well, but I doubt that will happen.