Negative feedback eBay seller opinions? (slab received badly scuffed)

[budsbundy]

OK

It was scuffed before he sent it, you can see it in the first and last pics, but it would be easy to mistake for a reflection if you didn't know it was there already when looking at the pics.

 

He had to know it was scuffed, and he didn't say a word about it in the auction.

 

I'm a little more inclined now to say he should do something for you, as it's clear that you're not trying to scam him, and there's no way he didn't know about that scuff.

 

I bought a slab recently with a much smaller scuff than that, and the seller clearly stated it was scuffed in the auction description and priced it accordingly.

[Wall-Crawler]

Judging by the scans of the listing it appears that it must have happened during shipping as I don't see it on the scan...Crappy work monitor. How was it packaged?

 

Yes, I can see the seller wanting the book back...I had a minor debacle with a buyer even claiming a CGC book I sold him was tampered with and that the CGC case was damaged when it was perfect. Guy was just a moronic noob. Frustrating, believe me, so if the seller has had a lot of requests for partials, seems straight refund is the way to go here from the sellers perspective b/c it is impossible to tell who is an honest buyer sometimes.

 

Given the value of the book, what is another $12 if it won't buff out? Definitely does not warrant a negative. Neutral, I am leaning towards no. The guy got back to you and offered a refund. If it was sent in a bubble mailer...Then we have a different story...

 

There is also a third option...What about no feedback?

 

Personally though, if it was well packed, stuff happens in shipping (I just got a cracked CGC slab back from CGC) - Keep the book and just leave a generic positive and move on.

 

 

 

 

[HarveySwick]

Neutral.

 

And maybe ding him on "How accurate was the item description?" if the description didn't clearly state there was a scratch like that.

 

You're not asking for much on an expensive book like that by asking for reslab fees.

 

Seriously? Whats your ebay handle so i can block it.

 

JTalive7 (thumbs u

 

another future problem avoided!

 

 

 

People with your ebay attitude are important to me. Keeps you from accidentally bidding on my auctions.

 

Well, I've been on eBay since 2001 and left one negative feedback and two neutral feedbacks. I generally leave personalized positive feedback. So if you think I'm a problem buyer - go on ahead and block me.

[Furby]

Another option is to pursue the eBay money back guarantee. It seems you are on Step 2 of eBay's recommended process. It couldn't hurt to escalate and see what they decide.

[Dr. Balls]

Nothing is ever resolved... ON THE INTERNET!

[rodan57]

 

There is also a third option...What about no feedback?

 

 

Wisdom.

[techvoodoo]

Seems to me the seller was trying to get one over on the buyer (not you personally, anyone who bought it in general). He didn't mention the flaw in the description and in the picture you can faintly make it out, but it would almost certainly be dismissed as a reflection.

 

I don't see offering a full refund in this case as a amicable solution. The buyer wanted the book, and still wants the book, but they also expected the case to be in good condition.

 

There's no way this was a mistake, or oversight, by the seller. The only resolution I'd be pleased with is a partial refund to cover the cost of getting the book reholdered. I think a negative, or at the very least a neutral, is warranted because I believe the seller was trying to take advantage of the buyer by not disclosing the flaw and trying to obfuscate it in the pictures.

[Jeffro.]

Seems to me the seller was trying to get one over on the buyer (not you personally, anyone who bought it in general). He didn't mention the flaw in the description and in the picture you can faintly make it out, but it would almost certainly be dismissed as a reflection.

 

I don't see offering a full refund in this case as a amicable solution. The buyer wanted the book, and still wants the book, but they also expected the case to be in good condition.

 

There's no way this was a mistake, or oversight, by the seller. The only resolution I'd be pleased with is a partial refund to cover the cost of getting the book reholdered. I think a negative, or at the very least a neutral, is warranted because I believe the seller was trying to take advantage of the buyer by not disclosing the flaw and trying to obfuscate it in the pictures.

 

The seller could have indeed been trying to pull a fast one. However, there is no way you can know that for certain. A neg when you can't prove shadiness? not warranted

[MoJoePin]

thanks again for the continued info on this, I hadn't studied the pictures that closely but will have to check them out and ask him about it. I feel I've won either way in terms of value but his actions are definitely questionable if he'd think noone would notice that huge scuff when they got it.

 

I'm going to try and buff it out before my friend picks it up tonight.

[HighStakesComics]

Seems to me the seller was trying to get one over on the buyer (not you personally, anyone who bought it in general). He didn't mention the flaw in the description and in the picture you can faintly make it out, but it would almost certainly be dismissed as a reflection.

 

I don't see offering a full refund in this case as a amicable solution. The buyer wanted the book, and still wants the book, but they also expected the case to be in good condition.

 

There's no way this was a mistake, or oversight, by the seller. The only resolution I'd be pleased with is a partial refund to cover the cost of getting the book reholdered. I think a negative, or at the very least a neutral, is warranted because I believe the seller was trying to take advantage of the buyer by not disclosing the flaw and trying to obfuscate it in the pictures.

 

Yeah, but like the previous poster said, there were items left out that would have BENEFITED the seller, but he chose to exclude them as well. I'm not sitting in front of GPA, but I think $400 is at least 20% below what these typically go for. If I got a book at a fire sale price, my course of action might be different than if I paid a premium. It sounds like the OP is happy with the price and for the most part the book. Sometimes it's best to let sleeping dogs lie.

[Dark Prime 0]

neutral with a glowing feedback about offering a full refund but just wanting the reholder fee for the scuff on the book which was not mentioned

 

or a positive but mention the seller never meantioned the scuff and refuses to pay for the reholder

 

if he mentions about it being pictured in a reply then reply about how the pic makes it look like a reflection and not a scuff

 

negative on this, never bc he's doing the right thing to cover himself and not be taken advantage of.......not saying you would but he doesn't know that your just some person on the internet and to him your word means nothing, words/lies are easy to say after all

[techvoodoo]

Seems to me the seller was trying to get one over on the buyer (not you personally, anyone who bought it in general). He didn't mention the flaw in the description and in the picture you can faintly make it out, but it would almost certainly be dismissed as a reflection.

 

I don't see offering a full refund in this case as a amicable solution. The buyer wanted the book, and still wants the book, but they also expected the case to be in good condition.

 

There's no way this was a mistake, or oversight, by the seller. The only resolution I'd be pleased with is a partial refund to cover the cost of getting the book reholdered. I think a negative, or at the very least a neutral, is warranted because I believe the seller was trying to take advantage of the buyer by not disclosing the flaw and trying to obfuscate it in the pictures.

 

The seller could have indeed been trying to pull a fast one. However, there is no way you can know that for certain. A neg when you can't prove shadiness? not warranted

 

I hear you, but you'd never be able to prove this with 100% certainty, it's not like someone trying to pull a fast one is going to admit it. We can only go on the info we have. That the book was scuffed before shipping, it wasn't disclosed, and the seller won't pay for reholding.

 

I think it was mentioned that the seller claimed he sold the book for too cheap in some communication with the OP, which I have a bit of a problem with. It was a BIN, he got what he was asking for, so that excuse holds no water.

 

I certainly wouldn't do business with that seller again, and if you care to warn others about your experience on ebay, a neg is the only tool you have to do that.

[techvoodoo]

neutral with a glowing feedback about offering a full refund but just wanting the reholder fee for the scuff on the book which was not mentioned

 

or a positive but mention the seller never meantioned the scuff and refuses to pay for the reholder

 

if he mentions about it being pictured in a reply then reply about how the pic makes it look like a reflection and not a scuff

 

negative on this, never bc he's doing the right thing to cover himself and not be taken advantage of.......not saying you would but he doesn't know that your just some person on the internet and to him your word means nothing, words/lies are easy to say after all

 

Here's the issue I have with this. He's not protecting himself from being taken advantage of. The blanket "I don't do partials because people scam sellers all the time" doesn't apply here. The seller knew (or should have) that the book had the scuff before it went out. He's not protecting anything, but his bottom line. This isn't a case where he might be getting taken advantage of from someone fishing for a partial.

 

In this case the seller 100% should offer both the option to repay for holdering or give a full refund (shipping included). It was his error and he should have been aware of it. Otherwise his policy is "I send broken mess and if you don't like it send it back".

[Jeffro.]

There is another possibility. Folks here tend to be quite anal about slabs being in pristine condition. I'm not sure that attitude is prevalent in the wider collecting community. It's possible that the seller didn't even think to mention the scuff. Some people may say wildly_fanciful_statement to that idea but it is a possibility. Not every comic seller on ebay is shady.

[MoJoePin]

There is another possibility. Folks here tend to be quite anal about slabs being in pristine condition. I'm not sure that attitude is prevalent in the wider collecting community. It's possible that the seller didn't even think to mention the scuff. Some people may say wildly_fanciful_statement to that idea but it is a possibility. Not every comic seller on ebay is shady.

 

Agree but for this specific case the scuff was just undeniably large and noticeable, the minute I pulled it out of the bag I was dissapointed.

 

I pulled the pics so you most likely didn't see them, here they are:

 

 

 

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Can we please not delete posts when a thread has gotten more than, say...4 posts?

 

This thread makes no sense, now, and has to forensically be pieced back together.

 

I take it there was some problem with the slab?

[RockMyAmadeus]

Ah, now I see...had to go to post 50+.

 

It's just a case, and can be easily fixed. Have the seller refund the cost to do it (including all shipping), and no muss, no fuss.

[HarveySwick]

Ah, now I see...had to go to post 50+.

 

It's just a case, and can be easily fixed. Have the seller refund the cost to do it (including all shipping), and no muss, no fuss.

 

The problem is...the seller refused to do that.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Orrrrrr....since you set a new record GPA low, do as Caira said.

[MoJoePin]

Can we please not delete posts when a thread has gotten more than, say...4 posts?

 

This thread makes no sense, now, and has to forensically be pieced back together.

 

I take it there was some problem with the slab?

 

Hah my bad I actually removed the initial post as to not be harmful to the seller's rep (since the eBay link was posted in the thread). Initially reading advice/opinion I felt I was jumping too quick to want to maybe give neg feedback.

 

But now amid new details I should have just kept it, sorry.

 

Short condensed version:

 

- bought a slab for a great deal

- slab arrived horribly scuffed (no mention in auction, horribly listed too)

- contacted seller to ask for re-holder fee

- seller would only take full refund send back book (as he "sold it cheap already")

- boardies found the original auction photos showed the scuff

- have sent pics and kind 2nd request for re-holder fee refund awaiting reply

 

 

.