vikinger wrote:

Several months later we were contacted by the buyer who claimed hat the suite was in such poor condition that he had had to throw it away. He was going to leave negative feedback unless we gave a refund. After challenging his thrown away claim, he admitted that he still had the suite, but some expert had looked at it and thought that it had been stored outside (which it hadn't).

Depending on how many months, they wouldn't be able to leave feedback anyway due to the cut off period for leaving feedback.  I wouldn't have refunded them and made it clear why on a response to their feedback - if in fact they left some.  If you only had their negative feedback out of your previous 100% record, sensible buyers would see that there was an issue with the buyer in that case when they checked the feedback - as any sensible buyer should do.  You should have reported his blackmail threat to eBay and told them of his deception (told it was thrown away etc).

Dave.

Dave Farr wrote:

vikinger wrote:

Several months later we were contacted by the buyer who claimed hat the suite was in such poor condition that he had had to throw it away. He was going to leave negative feedback unless we gave a refund. After challenging his thrown away claim, he admitted that he still had the suite, but some expert had looked at it and thought that it had been stored outside (which it hadn't).

Depending on how many months, they wouldn't be able to leave feedback anyway due to the cut off period for leaving feedback.  I wouldn't have refunded them and made it clear why on a response to their feedback - if in fact they left some.  If you only had their negative feedback out of your previous 100% record, sensible buyers would see that there was an issue with the buyer in that case when they checked the feedback - as any sensible buyer should do.  You should have reported his blackmail threat to eBay and told them of his deception (told it was thrown away etc).

Dave.

I am fairly certain that the rules at the time allowed feedback some time after the transaction, and the buyer in not leaving feedback at the outset knew what he was doing.  He is no longer registered on eBay (or has changed his ID!)

Graham

vikinger wrote:

I am fairly certain that the rules at the time allowed feedback some time after the transaction, and the buyer in not leaving feedback at the outset knew what he was doing. He is no longer registered on eBay (or has changed his ID!)

Graham

Shill bidding is the absolute worst... I've been outbid at the end of a few Beosound 9000 auctions, only for them to reappear a week or so later from the same seller.  Most people are fairly shameless about this practice, it's so common now...

I used to work with a guy who used to sell cameras via eBay.  He had all of his mates bidding on them for every auction just to push the price up!  It used to make me so mad.

I've also seen so many auctions finish to a 'high bidder' only for them to immediately reappear.  I've even questioned sellers about it and asking what happened to the original buyer - no response ever comes.  Some people are just selfish and completely shameless.

Dave.

Chris Townsend wrote:

eBay were meant to have a system that watched out for dodgy bidding. Patterns etc

 

Of course they have but so long as they receive the sellers fees etc, why would they be bothered?  They don't give a hoot about their reputation as can be seen by the way they treat some people who have had problems.  Some people have lost thousands of pounds due to scams and eBay always dodge out of any claims against them due to the smallprint and say it has to be taken up with the seller/buyer as eBay are just a conduit to get the two together.  They take no responsibility.

Dave.

Chris Townsend wrote:

eBay were meant to have a system that watched out for dodgy bidding. Patterns etc

eBay makes more profit on the seller fees if the item sells for more. A conflict of interest?