By "putting their cards on the table" I mean: eBay have a pretty clear policy that "not as described" is a valid reason for returning something. Unless the seller is poorly communicating this & simply mean they won't accept returns for reasons beyond this e.g. because you changed your mind (perfectly acceptable); then, by saying this, they're basically saying to hang with eBay's rules & to hang with your buyer protection. This is the way I'm selling. Well, sorry, this isn't a garage sale. This is a flagrant (or ignorant) breach (if they try & enforce, by refusing to accept a return) of eBay selling rules. And, as Stu alludes to & to answer your question; yes, it suggests the seller (if they do this intentionally & in full understanding) is not interested in accuracy or perhaps even honesty. I don't buy from sellers who state this in their listings. Nobody's forcing them to sell on eBay. They should at least have the decency to abide by the fairly basic rules that eBay lay down. They're hardly unreasonable.

Someone seriously overpaid for this:

This site uses affiliate links for which we may be compensated

The Hobbit by J R R Tolkien, Allen and Unwin, 1961

113384068329

Seller: kibblekibblekibbles

(170)

Ended Nov 20, 2018

This item ended more than 90 days ago

A good £125+ more than I paid for my 13th (in the last 6 months, and mine doesn't have the foxing). Anything more than £40 - 50 seems a bit daft for 60s copies.

Speaking of, here's a listing with a rare variation on 'no returns accepted': "Due to the 'rarity of this book', we are listing this as a 'no returns excepted listing' so...."

So "rarity of this book" and "no returns excepted listing" are in inverted commas? This book club copy of this edition is extremely common. Thanks for giving me a place to complain

This site uses affiliate links for which we may be compensated

BRAND NEW-The Hobbit J.R.R. Tolkien 50th Anniversary Gold Slipcase Hardback Edit

163386699922

Seller: livcharbro

(1049)

Ended Dec 21, 2018

This item ended more than 90 days ago

^ This is basically what I was talking about. If you need to return that due to it being poorly described, as is your right; then my guess is you're in for resistance. This should never be the case for any buyer if the seller is at fault. And a seller should never set their stall out preemptively in this fashion. Just looks like unnecessary fighting talk.

I think you are misintepreting "no returns" here. There are a lot of time-waster buyers out there that change their minds for little or no reason and then leave negative feedback if a seller won't accept returns claiming they were not made aware of the no returns policy.

Ebay allow sellers to decide if they accept returns from buyers who change their minds. "Not as described" is entirely different.

Ebay policy:

"If the buyer got their item but it's faulty, damaged, or doesn't match the listing description, you'll have to work with them to resolve their issue – you'll also have to cover the return postage costs. If they changed their mind, how you can respond, and who pays for return postage, will depend on your return policy."

Thanks for the clarification on the policy Deagol, I think that is a good point.

(p.s. congrats! Your link somehow is breaking the TCG bot. I am working to fix this.)

Right... I'd say that it's usually a good idea to check the seller's return policy even if you no intention of returning the item. It's just good to be aware of it and fully understand the terms of a sale, especially if you've paying a decent amount.

Among those time-waster buyers are plenty that change their mind/have buyer's remorse but still claim 'not as described' so they can get a free return. This is another instance when eBay will tend to side with a buyer (unfairly in my opinion). It's usually not at all difficult to tell when a seller has made an honest mistake in their listing as opposed to blatantly leaving out/skipping over important information about the condition. But even when a seller is accurate a buyer can nitpick and get away with it. There are too many documented examples of this that can be read about in the eBay community forum.

I just wish buyer and seller could leave feedback for each other. Sure, there was retaliation, but one could easily look back through negative feedback and determine if - on balance - a buyer or seller was an ass. By getting rid of buyer feedback, eBay pretty much broke itself. Has been downhill all the way since then.

I totally accept that this is a system ripe for abuse & that honest sellers (& buyers) are at the mercy of the unscrupulous...

I'm also not disputing or (I don't think) misunderstanding the limited returns policy that eBay operates. I know a seller doesn't have to accept (theoretically) returns "because the buyer changed their mind" i.e. for any reason other than the item being faulty/not-as-described. I'm saying if, as a seller, you state that you don't accept returns (particularly in SHOUTY talk) in the text of your listing (not the default eBay returns statement at auction top; I mean specifically manually adding this to your own listing), then you're implying to me that you probably don't fully accept even the limited reasons that people do have a right to return. This right can't be superseded by the sellers own special rules; therefore sellers should stop writing this vague crap in their listings. I don't need their interpretation of the eBay policy.

At the bottom of every (I think) seller's listing, who "won't accept returns for this item" (officially as part of their listing or as a seller generally), it also states "sellers may be required to accept returns for items that are not as described. Learn more about your rights as a buyer." Deagol quotes the specific advice to sellers (which isn't actually that black & white; although perversely it already states the seller will have to foot the cost for the postage return...); but anecdotal evidence (that you guys have stated here in regard to eBay siding with buyers) makes it abundantly clear there is very little "may be" about it (for faulty/not-as-described only.) In addition to this there are UK laws around distance buying which make what eBay or anyone else says kind of irrelevant.

I don't know if I'm making myself any clearer?

EDIT: Reading my previous posts I don't think I was that clear. When I referred multiple times to sellers that don't accept returns, I really meant sellers that go out of their way to state this in their listings, with (my interpretation) the express intention of meaning under any circumstances. I never really meant sellers that don't accept returns when buyers change their minds. That is a totally acceptable seller's policy that is not in any way in conflict with eBay's basic returns policy. Done now.

Stu wrote:
I just wish buyer and seller could leave feedback for each other. Sure, there was retaliation, but one could easily look back through negative feedback and determine if - on balance - a buyer or seller was an ass. By getting rid of buyer feedback, eBay pretty much broke itself. Has been downhill all the way since then.

Sorry, I'm probably missing something obvious, but what do you mean by this? How did eBay get rid of buyer feedback? Do you mean for returns?