From: Mike Redrobe on

"Marcus Redd" wrote:
> "Mike Redrobe" wrote
>> "Marcus Redd" wrote
>>>
>>> I certainly did want the item, but at the price he was clearly
>>> advertising it as, and not at the one that his *small-print* then
>>> indicated I had to pay
>>
>> *sigh*
>>
>> Some people might say that you describing "red capital letters"
>> as "small print" is quite misleading too.
>
> you really couldn't care less what the law says, could you?

To quote yourself: "That's just plain insulting and entirely untrue"

--
Mike




From: Niel Humphreys on
"bcc97" <bcc98(a)stork.plus.com> wrote in message
news:1165262497.842699.312720(a)j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Niel Humphreys wrote:
>> OK the law is on his
>> side and has given him the excuse but morally he is just another idiot
>> bidder who doesn't bother reading terms and conditions and then refuses
>> to
>> comply with them.
>
> Yes, there's some responsibility on the buyer to read the terms
> properly.
>
> But I wonder what the seller's motives are in offering goods to
> consumers in this manner -- i.e. so that the initial price you see (in
> the results page) is VAT-exclusive, and so that the headline price on
> the listing (i.e. the one next to the BIN button) is VAT-exclusive. It
> could be:
>
> a) that the seller is deeply concerned about having to pay eBay fees on
> the VAT element of the transaction, or
>
> b) that the seller knows that the misleading VAT-ex price in the
> results page will drive more potential customers to the listing, and
> that he will be able cynically to take advantage of those consumers who
> are in more of a hurry, who are less wary or who just miss the terms
> completely. Further, that he will take advantage of consumers' lack of
> awareness of DSR, and that consumers won't think to cancel until it's
> too late (3 months and 7 working days after delivery, unless he's
> complied with the information rules of DSR).


Seeing that it has already been established in one of the other threads on
this subject that all the seller's other auctions do quote a VAT inclusive
price in the text (I have not checked personally but no-one has refuted
this) I would think it's a fairly safe bet this this particular auction is a
genuine oversight and the seller had the unfortunate co-incidence that the
person who clicked BIN did so without ... well you know, I am not respeating
myself again. As such I would think any reasonable person would look to your
point (a) as opposed to your point (b) above.
--

Niel H
http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Snowdon-Computers
http://www.ebayfaq.co.uk/
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/UK_Powersellers/


From: Marcus Redd on
"Mike Redrobe" <mike(a)redrobe.net> wrote in message
news:M9%ch.11713$k74.5408(a)text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "Marcus Redd" wrote:
>> "Mike Redrobe" wrote
>>> "Marcus Redd" wrote
>>>>
>>>> I certainly did want the item, but at the price he was clearly
>>>> advertising it as, and not at the one that his *small-print* then
>>>> indicated I had to pay
>>>
>>> *sigh*
>>>
>>> Some people might say that you describing "red capital letters"
>>> as "small print" is quite misleading too.
>>
>> you really couldn't care less what the law says, could you?
>
> To quote yourself: "That's just plain insulting and entirely untrue"

Oh man, I'm dealing with angels here...


From: Marcus Redd on
"The Older Gentleman" <chateau.murraySPAMKILL(a)dsl.pipex.com> wrote in
message news:1hpu4fa.1yfstuu18hxpxdN%chateau.murraySPAMKILL(a)dsl.pipex.com...
> Marcus Redd <read(a)it.com> wrote:
>
>> You don't have to read my posts.
>
> Good.

Another one for the kf eh? In you go...


From: Marcus Redd on
"bcc97" <bcc98(a)stork.plus.com> wrote in message
news:1165262497.842699.312720(a)j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Niel Humphreys wrote:
>> OK the law is on his
>> side and has given him the excuse but morally he is just another idiot
>> bidder who doesn't bother reading terms and conditions and then refuses
>> to
>> comply with them.
>
> Yes, there's some responsibility on the buyer to read the terms
> properly.

He's so desperate to insult me now that my posts have revealed that he's so
unaware of what must be rather important laws relating to ebay. Surely
though, his being an ignorant seller is a little more worrying than a
self-confessed idiot-buyer like me? I mean, he claims to be running a
business there...

> But I wonder what the seller's motives are in offering goods to
> consumers in this manner -- i.e. so that the initial price you see (in
> the results page) is VAT-exclusive, and so that the headline price on
> the listing (i.e. the one next to the BIN button) is VAT-exclusive. It
> could be:
>
> a) that the seller is deeply concerned about having to pay eBay fees on
> the VAT element of the transaction, or
>
> b) that the seller knows that the misleading VAT-ex price in the
> results page will drive more potential customers to the listing, and
> that he will be able cynically to take advantage of those consumers who
> are in more of a hurry, who are less wary or who just miss the terms
> completely. Further, that he will take advantage of consumers' lack of
> awareness of DSR, and that consumers won't think to cancel until it's
> too late (3 months and 7 working days after delivery, unless he's
> complied with the information rules of DSR).

Absolutely. I've been saying this all along, yet St. Humphreys there just
cannot believe that a sacred seller on his beloved ebay could possibly have
even one impure motive in his heart. What planet is he on???