First bad Gunbroker experience

[Robert Kayland]

Originally Posted by he11zna

One thing that drives me NUTS about eBay/GB feedback is this.

As a buyer, once I pay for my goods, my end of the transaction is DONE.
I should receive positive feedback for a prompt payment. Plain and simple.

As a seller, once I receive a prompt payment, I leave feedback.

It doesn't always happen that way and 99% of the time, if I purchase something, the seller waits until I (the buyer) leaves positive feedback as almost an insurance policy of sorts. He can dick around with not shipping/bad service etc then slam me with a NEG (I have perfect feedback, so that kind of matters)

Pisses me off to no end...


Anyway, I've had little experience with GB (luckily all positive) so is there any way yo report him, or do a chargeback on your CC (if paid that way)

Either way, I hope you get some type of resolve and rule of thumb. As a buyer, do not leave feedback until the product is in your hand as described.

Speaking as a seller, I've had instances where I did everything right, but because the post office screwed something up or I had to wait for a check to clear, the buyer posts negative feedback.

So I'm in the habit of waiting to give feedback until the buyer leaves feedback and/or gives me the opportunity to make things right if something goes wrong. Otherwise, the seller is at the mercy of any irrational buyer.

Also, I've had plenty of instances where no feedback was left by the buyer because he's either inexperienced with eBay or lazy... so why should seller automatically give a positive merely because of payment? It's a two-way street, and the feedback system is the only way to establish a proper reputation for future confidence.

Of course, eBay recently changed things so the seller can't give negative feedback to buyers, go figure.

[QuakertownRich]

Originally Posted by Robert Kayland

Speaking as a seller, I've had instances where I did everything right, but because the post office screwed something up or I had to wait for a check to clear, the buyer posts negative feedback.

So I'm in the habit of waiting to give feedback until the buyer leaves feedback and/or gives me the opportunity to make things right if something goes wrong. Otherwise, the seller is at the mercy of any irrational buyer.
Not with gunbroker. You can respond to any post on your feedback if dealing with a nut, and rational ppl would understand. Seller has no reason to delay leaving feedback once contact, paperwork(FFL) and payment has been made. Why wait? You've been paid in timely fashion. To hold leaving feedback is what we're talking about by sellers using that as a blackmail. That's prolly how this guy I'm dealing with has gotten away with being an a-hole and not named.
Also, I've had plenty of instances where no feedback was left by the buyer because he's either inexperienced with eBay or lazy... so why should seller automatically give a positive merely because of payment?
Because he's completed his half of the deal, putting full trust that you shall reciprocate in kind. He is the one who put that blind trust out there, not you. Why should your feedback left for him as a buyer depend on what he puts for you first? It's a two-way street, and the feedback system is the only way to establish a proper reputation for future confidence.

Of course, eBay recently changed things so the seller can't give negative feedback to buyers, go figure.

We're talking gunbroker here, not ebay. That's a different pot of fish altogether.

[he11zna]

Originally Posted by Robert Kayland

Speaking as a seller, I've had instances where I did everything right, but because the post office screwed something up or I had to wait for a check to clear, the buyer posts negative feedback.

So I'm in the habit of waiting to give feedback until the buyer leaves feedback and/or gives me the opportunity to make things right if something goes wrong. Otherwise, the seller is at the mercy of any irrational buyer.

Also, I've had plenty of instances where no feedback was left by the buyer because he's either inexperienced with eBay or lazy... so why should seller automatically give a positive merely because of payment? It's a two-way street, and the feedback system is the only way to establish a proper reputation for future confidence.

Of course, eBay recently changed things so the seller can't give negative feedback to buyers, go figure.

Why should the seller leave feedback once the buyer pays?
Seriously?
What more does the buyer have to prove than pay in a timely fashion.

Bottom line is once the buyer PAYS. His end of the deal is finished. Period.
Seller should do the right thing and leave feedback that moment.

Would you, as the seller ship the item without receiving payment?
No, I didn't think so.

You say the seller is at the mercy of an irrational buyer to maybe, possibly leave a negative feedback. Well the buyer is at the mercy of the seller to maybe, possibly get a product which was paid for!

Too many times have I had lousy sellers hold the feedback over my head because it was there.

I'm glad eBay changed their policy. Except with the increased listing fees and all...

[Xringshooter]

QuakertownRich, get in touch with Gunbroker, there is a place to contact them to report fraudulent sellers. Give them the whole transaction, including the auction number. They can then see that he had said shipping included. So far as I have seen, the folks that run it want to run a clean site. What the seller says in the auction description is what they are supposed to do and if they don't Gunbroker can do things up to barring him from being on the site. Report him ASAP.

[bennettgun]

Remember feedback on gunbroker can be changed up to 90 days after auction. you can give an F now and a "lets come to a settlement" note. Then e-mail him and tell him you will remove when satisfied.

[GunLawyer001]

Originally Posted by he11zna

Why should the seller leave feedback once the buyer pays?
Seriously?
What more does the buyer have to prove than pay in a timely fashion.

Bottom line is once the buyer PAYS. His end of the deal is finished. Period.
Seller should do the right thing and leave feedback that moment.

Would you, as the seller ship the item without receiving payment?
No, I didn't think so.

You say the seller is at the mercy of an irrational buyer to maybe, possibly leave a negative feedback. Well the buyer is at the mercy of the seller to maybe, possibly get a product which was paid for!

Too many times have I had lousy sellers hold the feedback over my head because it was there.

I'm glad eBay changed their policy. Except with the increased listing fees and all...

The buyer does a lot more than just pay. Buyers sometimes try to extort additional items or a rebate on price, which knocks them down from a good buyer to a really bad buyer.

I've had 2 bad encounters with crazed sellers on Gunbroker. The details don't matter, except that there were huge red flags about each that only became available once I won the auction and had access to their info. In each case, they were booted off Gunbroker for provable rules violations. They probably consider me a bad buyer, but all I asked for was compliance with Gunbroker rules to which I was entitled before I was obliged to send payment.

Sellers are at risk until the buyer leaves good feednback. Buyers are at risk until they receive the goods. So buyers should leave feedback first, when the goods are received and examined. Sellers don't demand concessions once money is received, but buyers sometimes claim that goods are defective.

In practice, there's almost no real legal recourse if you send money and get nothing back. You can leave negative feedback, you can have their membership revoked, you can try to get the police interested if the amount is high enough, but you can't force them to return money without an interstate lawsuit, so stealing up to $5K from anyone at least 500 miles away is pretty safe.

[Robert Kayland]

Because he's completed his half of the deal, putting full trust that you shall reciprocate in kind. He is the one who put that blind trust out there, not you. Why should your feedback left for him as a buyer depend on what he puts for you first?

No, the buyer has not completed his half of the deal... online transactions are not brickfront purchases... and for a seller, doing business online demands that he have a good rating to establish trustworthiness for future business, otherwise he's dead in the water.

A buyer's feedback reputation isn't merely a reflection of "he pays"... obviously he pays, otherwise there would have been no transaction... it's also (and more importantly) a seller's assurance that the buyer is a reasonable customer and gives appropriate feedback himself... positive when the transaction goes well, or negative only in those instances where he's communicated properly with the seller when he was dissatisfied yet received no subsequent satisfaction.

Many folks, rightfully so, won't deal with a seller unless he has a certain level of feedback... so part of the buyer's "deal" with online transactions is the implicit agreement to leave good feedback for a satisfactory transaction or, if something goes wrong, communicate with the seller and give him a chance to make good before leaving negative feedback.

So I say again, until the buyer has fulfilled the entirety of what an online transaction entails, the seller needs to protect his own reputation by first assuring that the buyer treats him fairly.

How would you feel as a seller if, for example, you sent out a package the day you got paid, including tracking and insurance, but because UPS somehow damaged the package en route, the buyer zaps you with a negative? Of if you were trying to establish a seller reputation online, but the buyers never left any feedback at all? Yet you're supposed to give them positive feedback automatically merely because of payment? I don't think so. Holding back feedback until the buyer has completed the ENTIRETY of what online transactions entail is the only way to protect your own good name.

I myself have been shorted several hundred feedbacks by lazy or inexperienced buyers... luckily for me, at this point it doesn't really matter as much because I have nearly 2000 positive feedbacks and an 100% rating.

In practice, there's almost no real legal recourse if you send money and get nothing back. You can leave negative feedback, you can have their membership revoked, you can try to get the police interested if the amount is high enough, but you can't force them to return money without an interstate lawsuit, so stealing up to $5K from anyone at least 500 miles away is pretty safe.

Speaking strictly from an eBay stance, this is why I use paypal as a buyer, and recommend it as a seller... there's some protection there from unscrupulous sellers in that paypal will get your money back for you from an eBay auction in which the seller didn't live up to his end of the bargain.

The best protection from bad sellers, though, is always to look at their feedback... personally, I won't buy anything from anyone with fewer than 50 feedbacks or any rating less than 99% positive. There's never a guarantee of course, but it cuts down on the probability of getting taken.

[GunLawyer001]

Originally Posted by Robert Kayland

. . .
Speaking strictly from an eBay stance, this is why I use paypal as a buyer, and recommend it as a seller... there's some protection there from unscrupulous sellers in that paypal will get your money back for you from an eBay auction in which the seller didn't live up to his end of the bargain.

The best protection from bad sellers, though, is always to look at their feedback... personally, I won't buy anything from anyone with fewer than 50 feedbacks or any rating less than 99% positive. There's never a guarantee of course, but it cuts down on the probability of getting taken.

I can't disagree, although I have to point out that PayPal (and their owner, eBay) hates us gun owners.

As for the feedback, even the notorious thief Dana Reed has good feedback, as "dropdbomb", so there's no guarantee that you aren't dealing with a criminal.
(Here's a link to a discussion of the scammer: http://www.hkweaponsystems.com/cgi-b...c&f=2&t=007533 )

The feedback is only as good as the seller's interest in maintaining a good feedback rating. There have been publicized instances of sellers building up a good record, then scamming a bunch of high-dollar auction buyers.

But hey, life is risk. You could die taking a shower, or get killed staying in bed.

[QuakertownRich]

Originally Posted by Robert Kayland

No, the buyer has not completed his half of the deal... online transactions are not brickfront purchases... and for a seller, doing business online demands that he have a good rating to establish trustworthiness for future business, otherwise he's dead in the water.

Yes, he has. If buyer has contacted seller, sent all info needed, along with payment that has cleared the bank, he is done. His feedback IS NOT in correlation with how YOU as the seller proceeds from there, that is feedback blackmail! I had one instance where seller changed my feedback from (A+)Great buyer! fast payment, quick communication..THANX!! A++++ to (F)Stay away from this buyer, total headache! after I left neg feedback for how item was misrepresented, shipped and condition variance. And don't say "just ship it back" as an answer to being promised Excellent condition! when received is a total turd, and I lose $60 on shipping both ways..not an option. It wasn't even close, pics were doctored/shaded to look much better than what it was.
Bright clean barrel! actually was smooth bore..rifling gone! so, boldface lying will draw negative feedback from me.

Originally Posted by Robert Kayland

A buyer's feedback reputation isn't merely a reflection of "he pays"... obviously he pays, otherwise there would have been no transaction... it's also (and more importantly) a seller's assurance that the buyer is a reasonable customer and gives appropriate feedback himself... positive when the transaction goes well, or negative only in those instances where he's communicated properly with the seller when he was dissatisfied yet received no subsequent satisfaction.

No, it's that he paid promptly, communicated quickly, and supplied all documentation in timely fashion. Your trying to justify your own procedure of feedback blackmail.

Originally Posted by Robert Kayland

Many folks, rightfully so, won't deal with a seller unless he has a certain level of feedback... so part of the buyer's "deal" with online transactions is the implicit agreement to leave good feedback for a satisfactory transaction or, if something goes wrong, communicate with the seller and give him a chance to make good before leaving negative feedback.

Again, we are talking gunbroker here..NOT ebay. Sellers have the same option of viewing buyers feedback and can block any he feels not worthy. Once feedback has been left, other party can respond. Also, once feedback has been posted, both parties have 30 days to alter/delete, so you as seller have time to make things right if you've f'd things up.

Originally Posted by Robert Kayland

So I say again, until the buyer has fulfilled the entirety of what an online transaction entails, (total bs) the seller needs to protect his own reputation by first assuring that the buyer treats him fairly.

How would you feel as a seller if, for example, you sent out a package the day you got paid, including tracking and insurance, but because UPS somehow damaged the package en route, the buyer zaps you with a negative? Of if you were trying to establish a seller reputation online, but the buyers never left any feedback at all? Yet you're supposed to give them positive feedback automatically merely because of payment? I don't think so. Holding back feedback until the buyer has completed the ENTIRETY of what online transactions entail is the only way to protect your own good name.

Once again, we are talking GUNBROKER here, NOT ebay. See above for feedback change possibility. This "ENTIRETY" you keep referring back to his merely a masked feedback blackmail, plain and simple.

Originally Posted by Robert Kayland

I myself have been shorted several hundred feedbacks by lazy or inexperienced buyers... luckily for me, at this point it doesn't really matter as much because I have nearly 2000 positive feedbacks and an 100% rating.

It's funny, I as a seller have been jipped of many feedback because the seller claims they are "so busy" and that I should have requested feedback left. It's a two-way street. Unfortunately, many sellers take your same feedback blackmail approach, and I almost always must later send email to seller stating I have left positive feedback and would appreciate they respond in kind. Needless to say, not all have bothered.
OP is about GUNBROKER, not any other auction sites. I feel you are not differentiating between them and lumping together, so let's stay on focus here and drop the ebay shit, don't care bout that site.

[QuakertownRich]

Originally Posted by wellcraft

it seems like things were a little fishy from the get go with the issue of shipping and things got worse when you actually received your product and were short changed so why did you leave him positive feedback? i would never leave anyone feedback positive or negative until i had my purchase in hand and had the chance to inspect it. with that said i would definately leave negative feedback since you're not satisfied and it doesn't look like he will make it right.

You answered your question for me with my quote above your question.
4 days till my feedback is safe, and his gets nuked.