Totally agree on the delivery thing.
And it’s one extreme or the other. Chucking it down with rain, no porch, oh this seems like a great time to leave a cardboard box on the doorstep.
Also why is it the only time anything is returned to the depot and not left with a neighbour or on the doorstep is a bag of coffee on Friday morning when you’ve ran out and now have no coffee for the weekend!
Incompetent people. I find this at work parts people are 95% useless.
Decent De1pro v1.45 - Niche Duo - Niche Zero - Decent is the best machine ever made -
Time wasters on eBay. Not as bad as the other things on this thread, but still. Especially, those with complete disregard to the fact that there are other humans involved on the other side, just like them.
Put up an auction. Got loads of interest and dozens of bids. One j*** uses a snipping tool to snatch the sale at the last second under everyone’s nose, then vanishes - doesn’t pay and ignores all messages. Due to eBay’s policy, there is no option to cancel the sale and offer the item to the next bidders until all the interest is gone and you have to start over. Happened to me a few times already.
I stopped selling on ebay years ago when I’d have offers for my phone that never paid, but ebay still charged me selling fees. You could never get hold of anyone to speak to.
I had a friend have the same happen to him but they were unable to get the money from his account. They tried passing it over to bailiffs and wouldn’t respond to his messages explaining what happened. Horrendous company.
A few years ago, I sold an old Macbook as spares or repair, not working. The guy who bought it thought he new the fix and when he could not fix it, put a claim in saying it was faulty. Ebay paid out despite my protests. I had 1100 feedback and closed my account immediately. I only use them today through gritted teeth!
dutchy101 I stopped selling on ebay years ago when I’d have offers for my phone that never paid, but ebay still charged me selling fees. You could never get hold of anyone to speak to.
I never had a problem with eBay charging fees for non-paid items. It’s all automated, so if a sale fails for non-payment the fees are not paid. As you say, it is very hard to get the attention of a human when something is out of the ordinary, but unfortunately wasting other people’s time is a very ordinary thing on eBay, as there are no consequences to it (they get a strike, and when they have enough strikes to disqualify them - they open a new account and start over). It’s a shame, because there are mostly decent people, but some j**** spoil the experience for the rest.
dfk41 A few years ago, I sold an old Macbook as spares or repair, not working. The guy who bought it thought he new the fix and when he could not fix it, put a claim in saying it was faulty. Ebay paid out despite my protests. I had 1100 feedback and closed my account immediately. I only use them today through gritted teeth!
I once bought a monitor and it arrived with a smashed screen. Posted a photo on receipt but the seller insisted I send the broken monitor back on my expense (!) for a refund. eBay didn’t want to know and I had no choice but to pay for return shipping. Fortunately this was the exception for me, and mostly my experience was fine. Non-payers, on the other hand, is very common. eBay could do more to fight this, but they don’t.
I’m going back probably almost 20 years and was selling a mobile phone at the time. I had someone from Nigeria ‘buy it now’ and offered me money via a Western Union transfer that they would send me when they received the phone. OK mate, I’ll send you the phone on those terms, lol. Ebay still charged me.
Exact same thing happened to my mate. I found out afterwards that you could make your listings UK Paypal buyers only, which would have prevented ebay taking their fees but they did not respond to myself or my friend when we tried to explain. I gave up and decided never to sell on their shitty platform again
I’ve never sold on Ebay for all of the above reasons. I do buy there but with extreme caution. The one time I got burned Paypal eventually made the seller do a full refund.
Things that make me go grrr…..
People who rip other people off, especially those in trouble or vulnerable in some way…then along come the opportunists.
I remember one story about someone who went to “help” a victim of an accident or medical emergency, but what they were really doing was rifling their pockets for their wallet.
https://www.itv.com/news/2018-09-05/mans-wallet-stolen-as-he-suffers-heart-attack
DavecUK People who rip other people off, especially those in trouble or vulnerable in some way…then along come the opportunists.
I remember one story about someone who went to “help” a victim of an accident or medical emergency, but what they were really doing was rifling their pockets for their wallet.
Makes time wasters on eBay seem like angels.
Some buyers are as notorious as sellers. Recently, sold a pair of hardly used suit. It was out of fashion. Some one nagged us with endless questions and finally bought the suit. No sooner the buyer received it than he/she complained it wasn’t as described, which was not correct. Demanded a return, despite a no-return policy on used items. It wasn’t worth a hassle to start a futile time-wasting argument. Ebay advised it’s not worth it either. It was expensive to pay for the return postage. We refunded the buyer and advised the person to give the suit to a local charity.
LMSC It was expensive to pay for the return postage. We refunded the buyer and advised to give the suit to a local charity.
Think sometimes making a point like this is the best way. There’s just no pleasing some people.
We had a rug that we were giving away for free that my wife put up on a local Facebook group. Someone said they wanted it and expected us to drop it to them. Lol
Had a guy come in for a quote at work, 2009 Saab.
Conversation starts with, “I’d use a mate normally but you know what they’re like, they want favours back, don’t mind paying cash”
Proceeds to show me round his car, “there’s a crack in the bumper but you can just glass that” (wrong way) then walks round the car to the point we’re painting everything bar 2 panels.
So I email his quote, which is broken down as labour, paint and materials and polishing,
Following day, he replies. “happy with the labour but why is the paint and materials so high? Is it primer, paint, sanding discs? ”
I simply replied - this is what we charge.
Fast forward to the end of the day and he’s left us a negative Google review 🤷 wtf.
Decent De1pro v1.45 - Niche Duo - Niche Zero - Decent is the best machine ever made -
Touch the rental market — landlords. Jeez! Very rare you find a Gem,
based on our experience. Between 2001 and 2014, we stayed in 4 places.
Glad, we have a roof of our own since 2015. We keep telling our daughter to get even a single bed as her own roof as soon as she starts her core training and scale up as she grows with NHS. With the NHS salary, she keeps asking how ? 😔
LMSC in situations like this it is worth pursuing through tenancy deposit schemes. If the property was left clean condition with no damage above reasonable wear and tear you’d have your deposits back in full.
mailto:kafar@btinternet.com
I’ve bought on Ebay for Donkey’s years for stuff ranging from £1 to £1,500 and had no problems, never once having to send anything back or had something that wasn’t as described or arrived damaged. Only recently sold a few things (Gaggia, Brasilia grinder and Sage grinder) and again not had a single issue. Guess I’m just lucky.
Got to admit, after looking elswhere on the web I always check on Ebay for the same stuff and in doing so I’ve saved a fortune over the years.
OK, because I am now officially a curmudgeonly old git, I’ve started reading news articles more carefully. Which led me to make an IPSO complaint, as I am fed up with the continual deception and misleading articles in the news media. For your delectation here are a couple I found particularly egregious and felt the need to complain. Remember we will all get old and we will probably all have to own an electric car, enjoy:
**To:**inquiries@ipso.co.uk
Fri, 17 Jun at 12:53
I wish to complain about 2 articles in the express I consider breaks the editors’ code clause 1. Accuracy.
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1624868/ev-charging-31-hour-wait-leeds
This article makes misleading claims that would lead people to think extended public charging times exist in this and other cities. The specific problems are:
The headline subheading reinforces the misleading claim
the second paragraph further reinforces the incorrect and misleading claim
It’s based on a study done by a car leasing company (of predominantly or wholly non electric vehicles), hence a conflict of interest in providing accurate, non misleading study. https://carleasespecialoffers.co.uk/
The entire article and wait times are actually based on to completely unreasonable assumptions
That no electric car owner has a charger at home
All electric car owners in an area try to charge their cars at once and all cars presumably requiring a full charge.
Why this matters: The law regarding Petrol and Diesel field cars is changing, this article has the potential to incorrectly and heavily influence the decision motorists are increasingly having to make on their next vehicle. It has the potential for a significant financial impact on those decisions and may delay the adoption of those technologies.
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1624664/elderly-drivers-road-traffic-collision-failed-look-crash-studyThis article makes misleading claims and contains inaccurate information about the risk factors for elderly drivers. Namely elderly drivers cause more accidents than younger drivers as they fail to look properly.
The headline subheading reinforces the misleading claim and in facts states “half” even based on other statements later that say 4 out of 10
The second paragraph relating to the PA study could be easily read as 4 out of 10 elderly people don’t look properly. This doesn’t take into account those involved in a collision that was not their fault, it is not grouped by age so there is no valid definition of “elderly” except to say over 70. This data could be massively skewed by drivers aged over 85! In needed to be in the context of age groupings 70,75 80 85
“The analysis of the DfT data showed that the mistake contributes to 42.6 percent of collisions involving drivers over the age of 70. The figure stands at 35.7 percent for all other ages.” This statement illustrates the extent of the deception, as by not setting an upper age limit to the study and just saying over 70…all drivers over 70 are only going to have an increased risk factor of “failing to look properly” of 7%, not the 42.6% implied. e.g. out of all the drivers under 70 if 100 had an accident 35.7 drivers would have not looked properly as opposed to 7 drivers more over 70
Such a clear difference at 70 is unlikely, but again the implication is at 70 than number jumps by 7, this is extremely unlikely
It neglects to mention that the vast majority of accidents of all types involve younger drivers, giving the clear impression elderly drivers are more likely to have an accident. “The research added that elderly drivers are more likely to cause a crash”. This statement is blatantly untrue, even correcting for miles driven.
Why this matters: Insurance rates, elderly driver confidence, perception of elderly drivers by other road users are all negatively affected. The article could easily encourage age discrimination and aggressive behaviour of other road users to elderly drivers. All of this based on a distortion of the data and an omission of the true accident statistics.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have further questions about either article
