eBay!

[jakeblu]

I've just had a request from the buyer of my Oly 12-50mm asking to return as it's 'Not as Described'. They received the item, according to RM Tracking at 12:55 and by 13:55 they had put a request in for a return. Basically they're saying that the lens is soft, produce a halo around the image and has purple fringing. The photo provided was a joke, a heavily cropped section of t a backlit scene of an ornamental wooden house, sat on a windowsill with the sun shining through the window. It has a metal ring on top and there is some fringing around that but it's in direct sunlight. it does have the glow you'd expect from a backlit scene but it's exaggerated by camera shake. Ive asked for the full image with exif intact to check but they won't provide it. Ive had this lens for over 18mths it's optically a good performer for what it is and takes perfectly fine images that are sharp and contrasty. I have literally hundreds of photos to attest to this. Many of those ar backlit scenes which are perfectly fine. It's hard to tell if they're a complete novice at photography and that they really don't know what they are doing or they know exactly what they're doing.

The claim is bogus but I appear to have to accept the return. There is no option to refuse the return. I could simply ignore it but eBay will likely refund him anyway and not require the lens to be returned, so it's a double whammy for me. For all intents and purposes, eBay treat private sellers in much the same way they do with business sellers regarding returns. I may put on my listing returns not accepted but all the buyer has to do is use those three magic words 'not as described' and I have no choice other than to refund.

 

[Sangoma]

I've just had a request from the buyer of my Oly 12-50mm asking to return as it's 'Not as Described'. They received the item, according to RM Tracking at 12:55 and by 13:55 they had put a request in for a return. Basically they're saying that the lens is soft, produce a halo around the image and has purple fringing. The photo provided was a joke, a heavily cropped section of t a backlit scene of an ornamental wooden house, sat on a windowsill with the sun shining through the window. It has a metal ring on top and there is some fringing around that but it's in direct sunlight. it does have the glow you'd expect from a backlit scene but it's exaggerated by camera shake. Ive asked for the full image with exif intact to check but they won't provide it. Ive had this lens for over 18mths it's optically a good performer for what it is and takes perfectly fine images that are sharp and contrasty. I have literally hundreds of photos to attest to this. Many of those ar backlit scenes which are perfectly fine. It's hard to tell if they're a complete novice at photography and that they really don't know what they are doing or they know exactly what they're doing.

The claim is bogus but I appear to have to accept the return. There is no option to refuse the return. I could simply ignore it but eBay will likely refund him anyway and not require the lens to be returned, so it's a double whammy for me. For all intents and purposes, eBay treat private sellers in much the same way they do with business sellers regarding returns. I may put on my listing returns not accepted but all the buyer has to do is use those thee magic words 'not as described' and I have no choice other than to refund.

It is unfortunate that you have fallen foul of a system that has evolved to prevent sellers from being able to wrongly describe things and catch out buyers.

We buy a lot of "normal shopping" on ebay, and quite often we get things that are far from correctly described, and for that reason are happy with the way the system works.
In the last 12 years, we have had 5 items we sold returned for reasons I don't think are valid, and have gone on to sell them without problem, so I can't really complain from that side.

 

[Sky]

I'll only buy from the Evil Bay - selling on there is a nightmare IME.

 

[nog]

Ebay rules are primarily set to protect the buyer, unfortunately the system can be abused. They could alter the rules a bit but it would probably cost ebay money or sales and that won’t happen.
I wonder what % of sales are returned, personally I have returned 2 items this year one was described as version 2 but was version 1 and the other said manufacturer‘s gtee included but it did not qualify for a gtee.

 

[Box Brownie]

I hope and trust that you have both a written record & photographic record of its serial number and physical condition........

Because the cynic in makes a surmise that this smells a bit fishy

Either that or the buyer has an unknown agenda in regard to trying to find a copy of the lens that matches their unachievable performance criteria!

 

[jakeblu]

It is unfortunate that you have fallen foul of a system that has evolved to prevent sellers from being able to wrongly describe things and catch out buyers.

We buy a lot of "normal shopping" on ebay, and quite often we get things that are far from correctly described, and for that reason are happy with the way the system works.
In the last 12 years, we have had 5 items we sold returned for reasons I don't think are valid, and have gone on to sell them without problem, so I can't really complain from that side.

I don't have a problem with eBays return on the grounds of 'not as described' I've done it myself. It's the blanket acceptance of the buyers word that bothers me without even giving me an option to challenge it.

I hope and trust that you have both a written record & photographic record of its serial number and physical condition........

Because the cynic in makes a surmise that this smells a bit fishy

Either that or the buyer has an unknown agenda in regard to trying to find a copy of the lens that matches their unachievable performance criteria!

I always do? I don't think the buyer is looking to scam me that way but rather simply changed their mind either because they bought the wrong thing or had found it cheaper. I mean they had the lens less than an hour before requesting a return.

 

[gramps]

they had the lens less than an hour before requesting a return.

On the positive side, that hopefully means that they haven't had time to misuse it.

 

[cambsno]

Which is why I am reluctant to use it for serious sales - years ago I sold a phone, returned as "not described" and a different phone was returned. Buyer protection all the way

 

[Coho-Blue]

So what are the rules if you had stated “”RETURNS NOT ACCEPTED””

Are you say that you would not be covered by stating that you won’t accept returns if he buyer states that the item was “”Not as Described”” ?

Don’t you have any comeback ? Can’t you challenge their claim and ask to clarify how it’s not as you described it ?


Coho - Blue

 

[nog]

So what are the rules if you had stated “”RETURNS NOT ACCEPTED””

Are you say that you would not be covered by stating that you won’t accept returns if he buyer states that the item was “”Not as Described”” ?

Don’t you have any comeback ? Can’t you challenge their claim and ask to clarify how it’s not as you described it ?


Coho - Blue

As OP said if buyer claims “not as described“ they can return item and it’s quite easy to think of a reason item is not as described, buyer could claim lens not focusing and ebay can’t check and will believe the buyer rather than the seller. Stating not as described may discourage some from returning an unwanted item but sadly it’s an easy rule to circumvent.

 

[the black fox]

I guess I’m really lucky never had that problem touch wood in a few thousand transactions .. had to return a few things not described correctly or broken on arrival ..
Only got scammed once by sending a 99p item unrecorded , now minimum postage is proof of delivery etc or if over a tenner signed for etc .. only use Royal Mail never cheapo couriers .. and always extremely precise in wording in adverts .
In Steve’s case it’s probably the buyer is new to either photography or Olympus and expected more than they received .. personally I would message them and ask them to try it again under better conditions before returning .
There are so many new to Olympus users since the OM1 appeared with sometimes wild expectations of what there buying

 

[jakeblu]

Don’t you have any comeback ? Can’t you challenge their claim and ask to clarify how it’s not as you described it ?


Coho - Blue

I've no recourse at all. I can report the buyer saying he's abusing the return system, but I still have to accept the return and refund him. If they find in my favour, they may refund the return postage which I've paid for.

In Steve’s case it’s probably the buyer is new to either photography or Olympus and expected more than they received .. personally I would message them and ask them to try it again under better conditions before returning .
There are so many new to Olympus users since the OM1 appeared with sometimes wild expectations of what there buying

They're not going to do that Jeff, in his initial post barely an hour after receiving the lens he said it was already packed awaiting a return label!

I think what annoyed me more than anything was how they trashed the lens in their reasons for return. It's actually a decent performer for what it is and if I'm honest I'm struggling to see that my recently aquaired 12-45pro is that much better.

These two were taken in the last month

spidy by Steve Vickers, on Flickr

scarcstle by Steve Vickers, on Flickr

 

[the black fox]

Yep I know there a good lens steve had one myself .. one of Olympus unsung gems

 

[AMcUK]

I wonder if your purchaser thought they were buying the 12-40mm Pro lens at a bargain price and then realised their mistake?
Very disappointing experience for you

 

[the black fox]

As I said earlier there is a lot of interest in olympus stuff at the moment , sold 3 bits this week so far on evil bay , lens hood 2 days , mmf adaptor 1 day , and 50mm MF lens took just over a hour . All at the price I wanted ..weird at the moment