Anyone sued anyone on ebay?

[MrRockliffe]

the terms of a private sale don't legally allow people to change their minds after the fact, but I usually do make concessions.

Ah okay I didn’t know that

I appreciate the offer, might take you up on it at some point when is there not something going on? Haha.

Please do, and in the mean time, hope all well

 

[Raymond Lin]

You still had the item in the end = no loss.

Case closed.

 

[Raymond Lin]

Ah okay I didn’t know that


Please do, and in the mean time, hope all well

they don’t allow cancellations, hence eBay has a strike rule on their account. OP wants to take it further, outside the rules he signed up for and into the courts.

 

[ik9000]

the european directives which still apply here, for the time being, do allow people buying on auction sites to change their mind, so long as they do not have the opportunity to inspect the goods in person beforehand, and/or basically that the auction is not taking part in a physical auction house. It gets a bit more muddy for private sellers vs private buyers and the listing wording comes into play, which unless the OP gives us a copy, we are in the dark over.

The County Court needs to see evidence of your losses and how they are reasonably attributed to the person you are claiming against. Then you also have to demonstrate what steps you have taken to avoid the case going to court in the first place. One of the first things the County Court looks at are whether there has already been any form of arbitration that affects their ability to rule on the case. Ebay's internal arbitration is such an example.

 

[ik9000]

You still had the item in the end = no loss.

Case closed.

in fairness to the OP it's not quite that simple in terms of the auction contract and the law, though I in no way agree with his stated course of action.

 

[Mr_Cool]

£100 in an investment account isn’t going to yield you a lot.

You’ve really not lost out on much.

Take the loss move on and smile, frown or whatever but move on mate.

If you were several grand out of pocket I could maybe understand, you’ve already got a strike against his account.

 

[Raymond Lin]

in fairness to the OP it's not quite that simple in terms of the auction contract and the law, though I in no way agree with his stated course of action.

The crux of it is he can only recover his losses, show me his losses when he has the item in his hand and is free to sell it for MORE than he originally sold it for as well as less. When the buyer pulls out of the auction, the item remains in your possession, therefore there is zero loss. You still have possession of it at that point, and how you deal with that after the fact is entirely up to you, including selling it for a lower price later on. If you have a figure in mine then there are mechanics within eBay for you to achieve that, a Reserve. If you have failed to utilise such tool then you have failed to mitigate your loss.

 

[Energize]

the european directives which still apply here, for the time being, do allow people buying on auction sites to change their mind, so long as they do not have the opportunity to inspect the goods in person beforehand, and/or basically that the auction is not taking part in a physical auction house. It gets a bit more muddy for private sellers vs private buyers and the listing wording comes into play, which unless the OP gives us a copy, we are in the dark over.

The County Court needs to see evidence of your losses and how they are reasonably attributed to the person you are claiming against. Then you also have to demonstrate what steps you have taken to avoid the case going to court in the first place. One of the first things the County Court looks at are whether there has already been any form of arbitration that affects their ability to rule on the case. Ebay's internal arbitration is such an example.

Absolutely, the buyer refused all attempts to engage in eBay's arbitration process.

they don’t allow cancellations, hence eBay has a strike rule on their account. OP wants to take it further, outside the rules he signed up for and into the courts.

The courts authority governs such sales so I'm not exactly taking it outside of the auction framework here.

 

[Raymond Lin]

The courts authority governs such sales so I'm not exactly taking it outside of the auction framework here.

The Auction framework has resolved this by putting a strike against him. You are taking this OUTSIDE the framework, a framework which you signed up to and accepted.

 

[Bug One]

Absolutely, the buyer refused all attempts to engage in eBay's arbitration process.

Seeing as you're not giving details - I can only assume you tried to get the 'non' buyer to send you money - for something he decided not to actually buy.

I'd have not engaged with you either.

 

[Blackjack Davy]

Apparently they had just changed their mind which is not an acceptable reason to me.

No ebay did not accept their reason which is why they issued a strike.

I attempted to offer a second chance offer but technical problems on ebay's side meant that was not possible.

You reported an NPB which eBay agreed with and issued a strike, case closed. You should have had your FVF non payable or refunded. If thats not the case then get in contact with eBay as they've slipped up somewhere. Anything after that is above and beyond the call in my opinion, thats your decision to make though.

 

[ahar]

I had to pay final value fees which I would not otherwise have paid because I took advantage of an offer on at the time and ultimately led to a delay of 2 weeks before getting money in my bank account which affected my cash flow.

If this goes to court and gets contested, I'd be very interested in the outcome against these two costs. My very very rusty memory on contract law would suggest it'll be hard to get them to accept the additional FVF as a cost, as they are a cost that you would normally have expected to pay on the transaction. The cashflow delay is also an interesting - I assume that you'd value the delay in cashflow against the cost of funding (e.g. overdraft interest for those two weeks for that amount etc)?

My guess is the buyer who pulled out won't bother contesting though.

 

[Spook187]

looooooooool thread of the day.

 

[Energize]

If this goes to court and gets contested, I'd be very interested in the outcome against these two costs. My very very rusty memory on contract law would suggest it'll be hard to get them to accept the additional FVF as a cost, as they are a cost that you would normally have expected to pay on the transaction. The cashflow delay is also an interesting - I assume that you'd value the delay in cashflow against the cost of funding (e.g. overdraft interest for those two weeks for that amount etc)?

My guess is the buyer who pulled out won't bother contesting though.

I'm not putting a value on the cash flow as it was so small as to be trivial, but it was obviously an inconvenience. Unlike the OCUK millionaires in this thread £100 is actually a lot of money to me though.

Seeing as you're not giving details - I can only assume you tried to get the 'non' buyer to send you money - for something he decided not to actually buy.

I'd have not engaged with you either.

Well that reflects on your character. He was contractually obligated by the eBay agreement to pay within 48 hours as the winning bidder, the fact that people are actually defending people defaulting on their agreements is shocking and explains why the courts are overflowing with cases....

 

[Diddums]

I'm not putting a value on the cash flow as it was so small as to be trivial, but it was obviously an inconvenience. Unlike the OCUK millionaires in this thread £100 is actually a lot of money to me though.



Well that reflects on your character. He was contractually obligated by the eBay agreement to pay within 48 hours as the winning bidder, the fact that people are actually defending people defaulting on their agreements is shocking and explains why the courts are overflowing with cases....

Do you actually think that here, in GD, where we hear about the ebay idiots at least twice a week, we are defending this guy? No, nobody is. We're collectively telling you to stop wasting your time, his time, ebay's time, the courts' time, our tax money, and whatever else I could think of to prove my point, for the sake of a few quid. Ask yourself this: is your time really worth that little? what if he fights back? That £100 will become the most expensive £100 you're likely to ever have to get back.


Don't be that guy. Cmon.

 

[Naff8000]

Can I sue someone for time spent reading this thread?

 

[Bug One]

Well that reflects on your character. He was contractually obligated by the eBay agreement to pay within 48 hours as the winning bidder, the fact that people are actually defending people defaulting on their agreements is shocking and explains why the courts are overflowing with cases....

Ha, so I was right. Fortunately, I don't think my character has been the one in question during this thread.

 

[m@rty]

The courts are probably overflowing with cases because of people like you raising utterly stupid claims

 

[Bug One]

I'm not putting a value on the cash flow as it was so small as to be trivial, but it was obviously an inconvenience. Unlike the OCUK millionaires in this thread £100 is actually a lot of money to me though.

Why waste another £25 then. I doubt it'll give you the vengeance you're after.

 

[ik9000]

I'm not putting a value on the cash flow as it was so small as to be trivial, but it was obviously an inconvenience. Unlike the OCUK millionaires in this thread £100 is actually a lot of money to me though..

Therein is the point. Cash flow so small as to be trivial, but you'd work yourself up enough to take someone to court over it?? Really?? Let it go man.