What to do with a bad ebay sale?

Something does not smell right here..

eBay like any other business is required to adhere to rules. You provided a tracking number they are required to look into it. If it has been marked as delivered by the postal service they have to find in your favor..no if's, and's or but's....been there, done that, and won..I don't care what anybody else may say...

Is there some detail you are leaving out??

I've had a few buyers try to claim they never got the item but once eBay found the package had been delivered they closed in my favor..

Next time use eBay shipping. A tracking number is automatically emailed both to you and the buyer...
 
Damn ... when I first started using eBay I was warned to be wary of dodgy sellers and managed to get burned quite quickly by a camera seller in the US who sent me a Leica IIIC with all sorts of issues and although I eventually sorted it out it was a ****ing nightmare!

The only dodgy buyer I've struck so far has been here at RFF so I can consider myself quite lucky and it's only happened the once.

I hate buying and selling (ebay or anywhere) ... it's a very tense process!
 
colyn said:
Something does not smell right here..

eBay like any other business is required to adhere to rules. You provided a tracking number they are required to look into it. If it has been marked as delivered by the postal service they have to find in your favor..no if's, and's or but's....been there, done that, and won..I don't care what anybody else may say...

Is there some detail you are leaving out??

I've had a few buyers try to claim they never got the item but once eBay found the package had been delivered they closed in my favor..

Next time use eBay shipping. A tracking number is automatically emailed both to you and the buyer...
Click to expand...

In any event did ebay give them a refund, then take their refund away when you produced proof the package had been delivered?

The buyer opened a dispute, the seller did not reply (apparently), the buyer escalated the dispute, ebay decided in the buyer's favor - and only after that did the seller provide a tracking number. That's what it sounds like. Although I wouldn't trust the buyer any further than I could throw them, it certainly seems like the seller was late to the finish every step of the way.

As ebay already made their decision and issued a refund, I don't think they have any reason to want to reverse their decision even if practically speaking it was wrong - as per their own rules they decided correctly.
 
Rather than threatening him with the Bar Association etc in the first instance what have your communications been like to date? If you know he has the lens have you tried simply writing to him and politely asking for either the payment or the lens to be returned under the circumstances? What have you got to lose? You can still pursue other options if this is unsuccessful but it seems unwise to ignore diplomatic solutions in the first instance particularly if you are dealing with a solicitor (who may well be very busy and time-poor, himself). I'm simply suggesting you try to keep your options open, instead of forfeiting them...
Regards
Brett
 
kuvvy said:
Sorry for you troubles but hopefully you will receive one or the other back and be satisfied. I used to use eBay but haven't done for some time and was luck only to have minor hiccups with buyers. In fact my most hassling deal was here on RFF.
Some people just aren't as honest and fair as others.

Paul
Click to expand...

Totally agree, I have some bad experience with RFF sale as buyer.
 
@ Mephiloco,

Based on the information in this thread, it appears as if your "buyer" (ha, ha) may have committed mail fraud. Mail fraud is a felony crime which carries a maximum punishment of a fine and/or twenty years of federal incarceration.

Take a look at the following:
Mail Fraud
A crime in which the perpetrator develops a scheme using the mails to defraud another of money or property. This crime specifically requires the intent to defraud, and is a federal offense governed by section 1341 of title 18 of the U.S. Code. The mail fraud statute was first enacted in 1872 to prohibit illicit mailings with the Postal Service (formerly the Post Office) for the purpose of executing a fraudulent scheme.

Initially, courts strictly followed the mail Fraud statute's language and interpreted it narrowly. The early decisions required a connection between the fraudulent scheme and the misuse of the mails for a violation of the mail fraud statute. Since its enactment, application of the statute has evolved to include dishonest and fraudulent activities with only a tangential relationship to the mails.

Punishment for a conviction under the mail fraud statute is a fine or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both. If, however, the violation affects a financial institution, the punishment is more severe: the statute provides that "the person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both."

Both the Supreme Court and Congress have consistently broadened the mail fraud statute since its enactment. Prior to a 1909 amendment, a violation of the mail fraud statute required proof, among other requirements, of either opening or intending to open correspondence or communication with another person. In 1909 Congress eliminated this requirement and replaced it with the language that the mails be used "for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do." This amendment followed the Supreme Court's decision in Durland v. United States, 161 U.S. 306, 16 S. Ct. 508, 40 L. Ed. 709 (1896), which held that the mailing only needed to "assist" in the completion of the fraud. Although this amendment was the last significant change until 1988, the Supreme Court has struggled with the relationship between the mailing element and the execution of the fraud.

The Court's struggle with this relationship is illustrated by two of its decisions: United States v. Maze, 414 U.S. 395, 94 S. Ct. 645, 38 L. Ed. 2d 603 (1974), and Schmuck v. United States, 489 U.S. 705, 109 S. Ct. 1443, 103 L. Ed. 2d 734 (1989). In Maze, the defendant stole his room-mate's credit card and car and signed his room-mate's name to the charge vouchers to obtain food and lodging. The merchants mailed the invoices to a bank in Louisville, Kentucky. The Supreme Court held that this did not fall within the scope of the mail fraud statute because the mailings did not perpetuate the fraud. The Court held that the scheme did not depend on the mailings and that the fraud was completed once the defendant signed the vouchers. The Court refused to interpret the statute as merely a jurisdictional requirement and stated that "Congress could have drafted the mail fraud statute so as to require only that the mails be in fact used as a result of the fraudulent scheme."

However, in Schmuck, the Court did expand the mail fraud statute. In Schmuck, the defendant sold used cars to auto dealers in which he had rolled back the odometers to inflate the vehicles' value. The dealers sent title application forms to the state department of transportation to register the cars after the dealers sold them to individual purchasers. The Court held that the sale of the vehicles depended on the transfer of title and that, although the mailing of the registration may not have contributed directly to the scheme, it was necessary for the passage of title and perpetuation of the scheme.

In recent years Congress has amended the mail fraud statute twice. In 1988 Congress added section 1346, which states that the term "scheme to defraud" includes a scheme to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services. In 1994 Congress expanded the use of the mails to include any parcel that is "sent or delivered by a private or commercial interstate carrier." As a result of these amendments, the mail fraud statute has become a broad act for prosecution of dishonest and fraudulent activities, as long as those crimes involve the mails or an interstate carrier.
Click to expand...
Link: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Mail+Fraud

18 USC Chapter 63 - MAIL FRAUD AND OTHER FRAUD OFFENSES

18 USC § 1341 - Frauds and swindles
Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, or to sell, dispose of, loan, exchange, alter, give away, distribute, supply, or furnish or procure for unlawful use any counterfeit or spurious coin, obligation, security, or other article, or anything represented to be or intimated or held out to be such counterfeit or spurious article, for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do, places in any post office or authorized depository for mail matter, any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Postal Service, or deposits or causes to be deposited any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by any private or commercial interstate carrier, or takes or receives therefrom, any such matter or thing, or knowingly causes to be delivered by mail or such carrier according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any such matter or thing, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. If the violation occurs in relation to, or involving any benefit authorized, transported, transmitted, transferred, disbursed, or paid in connection with, a presidentially declared major disaster or emergency (as those terms are defined in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)), or affects a financial institution, such person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.
Click to expand...
Link: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1341

And lastly:
Mail Fraud

What is mail fraud?
Mail fraud is an act of fraud that uses the United States Postal Service (e.g. making false representations through the mail) to obtain an economic advantage. Fraud is a knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce to another to act to his or her detriment.

What sorts of things constitute mail fraud?
It is a crime to use the postal system to carry out any sort of scheme designed to defraud someone. The statute makes reference not only to the United States Postal Service, but also to "any private or commercial interstate carrier."

What are the essential elements of mail fraud?
Mail fraud has just two elements: (1) a scheme to defraud; and (2) a mailing to carry out the scheme.

Is materiality required for a mail fraud conviction?
As with wire fraud described in the previous FAQ, materiality is also a requirement for mail fraud.

The Court has defined a material misrepresentation as one capable of influencing or having a "natural tendency" to influence the making of a decision. Here is what the Court has written: for there to be a material misrepresentation of a fact, it has to be expected that a reasonable man would attach importance to its existence or nonexistence in deciding what to do regarding the transaction in question
. . . or, the maker of the misrepresentation knows or has reason to know that its recipient regards or is likely to regard the matter as important in deciding what to do in the transaction, even though a reasonable man would not.

In other words, if a person knows that he is causing someone to think something is happening in a transaction other than what is truly occurring - even if he never actually tells a verbal lie - that constitutes a material misrepresentation

What kind of punishment could result from a violation of section 1341?
Conviction can result in a fine, up to twenty years in prison, or both.
As with wire fraud, a distinction is made for violations that affect a financial institution. The punishment in this instance can consist of a fine not to exceed $1,000,000, up to 30 years in prison, or both.
Click to expand...
Link: http://www.lorandoslaw.com/FAQ/Mail-Fraud.shtml

Of course you are free to pursue whatever course of action you deem fitting with regard to your situation.

JMHO, but if I were in your shoes, I would forthwith cut off all contact with the "buyer," file a formal written complaint of mail fraud with the USPS (which makes an investigation of the mail fraud claim mandatory by USPS) and file a complaint with the state bar association in the "buyer's" home state, informing them of the complaint filed with USPS.

The above actions should result in this situation being resolved to your satisfaction. I wish you the best of luck in whatever course of action you choose to take.

DISCALIMER
I am not an attorney. None of the above constitutes or is intended as legal advice.
 
Small claims counter vs Ebay.
Most small claims only require that you have a receipt of it having been sent.
 
I too use Ebay for most of my camera sales and purchases. I would rate my experiences 90+ out of 100.
BUT, I found out this week, be careful when buying used gear from an Amazon seller.
Their ad says: Camera and lens, batterys and strap"
I got a body only. Had to actually file claim with Amazon for refund. Seller said he only sells bodies, no lenses included.
He said error was Amazons not his.
Amazon refunded my money; he offered nothing.
 
Here's an update. I sent a message to the buyer, he's been really nice, I sent a brief 'You have my money and my lens, please return one of them, Thanks' which might've come off as rude. He responded asking for where to send the lens. I responded telling him that he's welcome to keep it, in either event I'll reimburse him for shipping for his trouble, and that I think he got a great deal on the lens ($290ish for the 21/4 with the rectangular hood).

Basically I think it's just that there was a break down in communication. Once the claim was filed with ebay all correspondence stopped as the wheels were already in motion and there was nothing to be done at that time.

My fault, in ebay's eyes, was that I didn't respond with a tracking number once a claim was filed. I admit that is my fault, though I still feel that their way of handling it after that shortcoming on my part leaves much to be desired.
 
Simply go to the police and file a report. If the item was delivered by the US post office, then the case may be considered "mail fraud" which is a felony offense. Tell the buyer you intend to file the police report unless he either sends you a payment, or returns the lens. He will probably see the light, you have all the evidence you need to prove your case.

Contact your buyer, do not use threatening or angry language, just state that you will be filing a police report over the transaction for fraud and mail fraud. Give him 48 hours to reply. If he doesn't, go to your local police department and file the report. Bring hard copies of whatever information you have. Your police department should have a detective or department which deals with such cases.

I used to work in law enforcement myself, and have heard about any number of similar cases. I have also sold more than 1000 cameras and lenses on eBay, and have rarely had a problem.

To protect yourself in the future, always ship with tracking, and keep you records on hand. Always insure every package you ship. Always be polite when dealing with problems, often a buyer or seller becomes foolishly obstinate if they believe they have been personally offended in any way.

Lastly, never let yourself get into a situation which requires you to sell your things to pay bills. It may sound more easily said than done, but I have been there myself. First, find a way to save more money (if you aren't saving against difficult times, you deserve what you get), and next, find a way to make more money. There is always a way. I have always worked outside my job to earn extra money, doing things like house painting, pressure cleaning, trimming trees, trading on eBay, or even washing cars. It adds up.
 
You guys need to read the guy's post. It's taken care of, the buyer and seller are communicating. All this litigation and felony mail fraud talk is hyperbole. Trust me, the cops barely go after major house burglary, they won't touch a 200 ebay complaint. Getting lawyers involved only benefits...guess who...the lawyers. Anyway, it's getting settled the RIGHT way, with communication between the parties.
 
Here's hoping the OP will get his lens or his money.

Regarding mail fraud: If that ever happens to anyone here, file a written mail fraud complaint with the USPS and leave the local police department out of the equation.

Personal experience: A person who I know had a home break-in; $15,000 USD in property was stolen. The guy's lease holder knew exactly who did it based on past experience with the thief and the car that was reported at the home at the time of the break-in. The lease holder called the local Douches With Badges (DWBs) and reported the details, telling them exactly who the perpetrator was and gave them his home address. The DWBs did nothing more than fill out their reports and file them. No investigation, no arrest.

Moral of the story - unless it's their property that has been stolen, (most of) the DWBs couldn't care less. Harsh but true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom