From: nick on

"Peter Parry" <peter(a)wpp.ltd.uk> wrote in message

>>> There is, but the point you are missing is that if a cancellation is
>>> made under the DSR's _or_ if the goods are rejected under the SOGA as
>>> not complying with the contract then there is no contract and there
>>> is no unpaid item.
>>
>>Well there is, as clearly commission on the sale has been paid to ebay,
>>and
>>it is only reasonable that this commision on the voided sale is returned
>>to
>>the seller.
>
> Agreed, that is a matter between the seller and eBay.

And as the buyer has signed up to ebays T&Cs which presumably point out that
if they don't pay three times then they get kicked off...

>>> Any term attempting to discourage people from asserting their lawful
>>> rights would, as has been pointed out, be judged unfair and
>>> unenforceable.
>>
>>I enforce it most weeks...
>
> Lots of people do illegal things, it doesn't make any of them right
> or that they will get away with it for ever.

I'm not doing anything illegal.

>>> The solution for sellers is very simple. Make your descriptions
>>> clear, honest and comprehensive. If you do you will get very few, if
>>> any, DSR returns.
>>
>>There's always going to be timewasters, and why should their incompetence
>>be
>>sponsored by sellers.
>
> Because the law says so.

Well does it?

> Reality is that those suppliers who have good descriptions and good
> customer service get very few returns.

Forget about returns, this is about people who don't pay.


From: bcc97 on

nick wrote:
> > Any term attempting to discourage people from asserting their lawful
> > rights would, as has been pointed out, be judged unfair and
> > unenforceable.
>
> I enforce it most weeks...
>

Not legally, you don't.

From: Peter Parry on
On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:57:51 -0000, "Alison Hopkins"
<fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote:

>> Absolutely, it is not really fair that seller gets stiffed because the
>> buyer has made the mistake or changes their mind on a whim.
>
>And then subsequent buyers will get penalised by higher prices.

No, if the seller puts up their prices to cater for a large number of
returns because of their poor selling practices then buyers simply
buy elsewhere from sellers who are more competent.
--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/
From: Sid on

"Alison Hopkins" <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:4tni2hF14vcr1U1(a)mid.individual.net...
>
> "bcc97" <bcc98(a)stork.plus.com> wrote in message
> news:1165397435.065046.142350(a)j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Of course, if Sid views himself as a charitable organisation whose
>> objective is to prop up the profits of sellers who ignore the law, then
>> he should just follow your advice, relist it and swallow the loss.
>> Because of the nature of clothing, all reputable mail order clothing
>> companies allowed returns before they were required to do so by law. I
>> doubt that Sid will use this seller again.
>>
>
> Bad form and all. I do think you are conflating two different arguments
> here. Mail order clothing companies allowed returns - and built the cost
> of them in - in order to increase business. Fair enough.
>
> Now, from what Sid has said, I can't see why he'd not use the seller
> again. His wife made a mistake - why is this the seller's fault? You're
> also assuming that the seller is running a business.

i've had another look and the sellers feedback is in the thousands (my
memory recall faded when i said 400), he is a powerseller, he sells loads of
clothing all brand new, some identical lines with different sizes, these
aren't unwanted gifts, so yes he is trading. I'd agree its not the sellers
fault, but the DSR do not specify that the seller should be at fault (as far
as i know).
Sid


From: nick on

"bcc97" <bcc98(a)stork.plus.com> wrote in message

>> > Any term attempting to discourage people from asserting their lawful
>> > rights would, as has been pointed out, be judged unfair and
>> > unenforceable.
>>
>> I enforce it most weeks...
>>
>
> Not legally, you don't.

Is ebay not legally allowed to choose what customers they want?

Are they not able to set rules governing how they expect their customers to
perform?