My greatest pet peave for as long as I have been active here on e-bay, is when a seller, for any reason, refueses to leave feedback first of the buyer, especially if the buyer has met all obligations of the transaction. The seller's feedback is supposed to be a ranking or gauge of thebuyer upon the buyer either meeting ornot meetingtheir obligations in the transaction. Since, in the vast majority of transactions, theseller recieves payment before shipping goods to the buyer, at that point the seller is in a position to publish their feelings (feedback) of the buyer based upon the buyer meeting the minimum transaction obligations. By this point the buyer most likely sent gepletepayment and done so in an appropropriate amout of time. This is where the seller should clearly publish their feedback (feelings) about the buyer.
Inmany of the transactions, the seller holds the buyer's feedback"hostage". In other words, they do not provide feedback unless the buyer does so first.Several of them have actually stated this to be an intentional act on thier part. One of them actually told me that they do not give feedback unless the seller is happy withthe trade and provides feedback first (bass ackwards)....aka, if thebuyer is not happy with theseller and they submit a negative feedback, thenthe sellerretaliates with negative feedback just for spite. What this results in is a falsenegative of the buyer for poor sellers/bad/unethical choice of feedback hostage. On another occasion I had a seller inform me that their feedback system is automatic and that it does not lodge a feedback until the sellers does....is this impersonal or what????? You mean to say that the seller cannot take the time to provide feedback on their own, in their own words, that they have to rely upon electonic form of saying thankyou (or otherwise) because their sales are so high they do not have the time? Do they forget that they were small once and that it is the BUYER that made them "too busy or too big" in the first place?
I have been the victum of this typeof retaliatory action several times in the past by sellers that I was not happy with, only to get a negative feedback for retaliatory reasons!!!
So how or why should a buyer, in any circumstance, get a negative feedback if they paid for the item in full and on time unless their feedback is held hostage?????
It is my hope that, as a buyer, your feelings be noted in your feedback of the seller that; "They did notprovide feedback even though I paid first, otherwisegood transaction." etc.
I cannot understand why e-bay does not provide some sort of mechanism that basically makes it madatory for the seller to provide feedback of the buyer based upon the following, gemunications, payment (on time and in full). I know that when I do not get feedback first, despite the fact that I met all criteria of a good buyer, I give the sellerneutral marks at best, in the feedback review (the five point star system). To me the feedback from the seller is part of the total buying experience. Many times when I do this I end up getting blocked by what is actaully a less than stellar seller.
ie; Take a look at my transaction (#380289961868). The seller sent me a torn print from a book and did notreveal this in the auction photo so I gave them a negative. They took 4 weeks to send it to me from New Jersey (Ilive in Central NY). After they gave me "AAAAAAAAAA " feedback; THEN thay said "HORRIBLE CUSTOMER, BLOCKED THEM WILL NEVER DEAL WITH THEM AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment