From: Dr Zoidberg on
I sold a couple of identical mobile phones recently (yes , I know......)
One had a large scratch/mark across the screen and one didn't , and as a
result the damaged one fetched �46 less.

I've just had an email from the husband of the buyer saying how they
weren't happy with this unexpected damage and they were going to file a
SNAD claim unless I gave them a replacement case or a partial refund.

That would be fine , apart from the second sentence in the listing was a
clear description of the damage and there was a nice close-up photo
showing the scratch.

Oh joy....
--
Alex

"I laugh in the face of danger, then I hide until it goes away"
From: petrolcan on
In article <hfb4ed$1g6$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Dr Zoidberg
says...
>
> I sold a couple of identical mobile phones recently (yes , I know......)
> One had a large scratch/mark across the screen and one didn't , and as a
> result the damaged one fetched £46 less.
>
> I've just had an email from the husband of the buyer saying how they
> weren't happy with this unexpected damage and they were going to file a
> SNAD claim unless I gave them a replacement case or a partial refund.
>
> That would be fine , apart from the second sentence in the listing was a
> clear description of the damage and there was a nice close-up photo
> showing the scratch.
>
> Oh joy....

Just tell them to send it back to you.
From: Niel J Humphreys on
"Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOO!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hfb4ed$1g6$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>I sold a couple of identical mobile phones recently (yes , I know......)
> One had a large scratch/mark across the screen and one didn't , and as a
> result the damaged one fetched �46 less.
>
> I've just had an email from the husband of the buyer saying how they
> weren't happy with this unexpected damage and they were going to file a
> SNAD claim unless I gave them a replacement case or a partial refund.
>
> That would be fine , apart from the second sentence in the listing was a
> clear description of the damage and there was a nice close-up photo
> showing the scratch.


Ask them to point out which exact part of the auction description was
incorrect - this will hopefully make them go back and read it this time then
hopefully notice it.

If they do file a SNAD you will win as what they will be complaining about
is clearly described ad photographed.

--



From: Mr Benn on

"Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOO!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hfb4ed$1g6$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>I sold a couple of identical mobile phones recently (yes , I know......)
> One had a large scratch/mark across the screen and one didn't , and as a
> result the damaged one fetched �46 less.
>
> I've just had an email from the husband of the buyer saying how they
> weren't happy with this unexpected damage and they were going to file a
> SNAD claim unless I gave them a replacement case or a partial refund.
>
> That would be fine , apart from the second sentence in the listing was a
> clear description of the damage and there was a nice close-up photo
> showing the scratch.

I sympathise and the buyer doesn't have a leg to stand on.

However, it's not just buyers. I bought a phone from someone on eBay. I
specifically asked if the phone had any scratches on it. I was told no, the
phone was in "near-new" condition.

The phone arrived, covered in scratches and after I complained, the seller
told me that I had put them there! He had used a stock photo in the
listing. Maybe I should have asked for a photo of the phone for sale.

Paypal weren't interested either telling me that the scratches didn't
materially affect the value of the phone :-(


From: Dr Zoidberg on
Mr Benn wrote:
> "Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOO!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:hfb4ed$1g6$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>> I sold a couple of identical mobile phones recently (yes , I know......)
>> One had a large scratch/mark across the screen and one didn't , and as a
>> result the damaged one fetched �46 less.
>>
>> I've just had an email from the husband of the buyer saying how they
>> weren't happy with this unexpected damage and they were going to file a
>> SNAD claim unless I gave them a replacement case or a partial refund.
>>
>> That would be fine , apart from the second sentence in the listing was a
>> clear description of the damage and there was a nice close-up photo
>> showing the scratch.
>
> I sympathise and the buyer doesn't have a leg to stand on.

True , however they could neg me , and there's always a slim chance that
paypal will do something random and decide in their favour.

> However, it's not just buyers. I bought a phone from someone on eBay. I
> specifically asked if the phone had any scratches on it. I was told no, the
> phone was in "near-new" condition.
>
> The phone arrived, covered in scratches and after I complained, the seller
> told me that I had put them there! He had used a stock photo in the
> listing. Maybe I should have asked for a photo of the phone for sale.

Absolutely.
I won't buy anything on ebay with a stock photo unless it's from a big
retailer.

> Paypal weren't interested either telling me that the scratches didn't
> materially affect the value of the phone :-(
>
Heh!

--
Alex

"I laugh in the face of danger, then I hide until it goes away"