An eBay problem and call for advice from a quasi-neophyte

[H_T_Davis]

Hi all. I'm new to this board, but have been lurking a couple of weeks, absorbing the shared wisdom. I am currently in my 4th bout with the hobby since the early 70's, so often things change without my being aware of it. I have a question about a problem (my first real one) that I am having with an eBay purchase and wanted some advice (if there is a better forum, please move my post).

I recently bought, paid for and received a card that was described as a PSA-6 in the title and in the body of the listing. When I got the card, it turned out to be a PSA-6 (oc). I went back to the listing and sure enough, the picture shows the card I received, qualifier and all. Now I'll be the first to admit that I should have looked at the picture, but as the card wasn't very expensive or rare at all, I'm sure that I gave a quick glance at the listing just before it expired, read it was a PSA-6 and acted. Several mistakes, I know, but it doesn't end there - naturally, the seller doesn't take returns (I don't know if this is the norm with the "new eBay", but weren't most sales of graded cards listed as no returns a few years back?).

I contacted the seller and asked if he would accept a return in this circumstance (with me eating all shipping costs, both ways) since the (oc) qualifier wasn't mentioned anywhere in the listing, only shown in the picture. He said he didn't know what the problem was, that he talked to eBay and they said he didn't do anything wrong, that eBay said I wouldn't ultimately be able to leave negative feedback and that in spite of the fact that he generally feels the customer is right, not in this case, so no return.

Isn't this similar to listing a graded reprint without ever mentioning that it is a reprint and just relying on the fact that the holder says "reprint?" Doesn't Ebay's rule about not putting conflicting information in a listing prevent this?

Is this worth pursuing, or does the fact that the picture showed it to be a PSA-6 (oc) mean I'm stuck. It's really not that much money that I'm out, but I feel like I've been had. I've never had a problem on eBay before and now this week, I get hit with this as well as a fake 1940 Play Ball.

[usernamealreadytaken]

No, buyer beware. The only time that can be pursued is if the listing and/or description is false or misleading. Omission of information is not grounds for such a claim. Take it as a lesson learned....

[Chicago206]

That seller is full of doggy doo doo. I guarantee ebay did NOT tell him you cant leave a neg. Thats simply a bold faced lie. The seller doesnt want the card back, so he made up a story of how he talked to ebay and they said he did nothing wrong. Almost laughable!

[jb217676]

You really have to check the picture carefully. Sellers will list a card as a PSA 6, then tell you it is actually a PSA 6 (OC) in the item description. This does 2 things for the seller: 1. Seller hopes buyer doesn't check picture carefully, realizing a potential higher price. 2. As long as the seller mentions the actual grade somewhere (does not have to be the title), he covers his butt.

In my experience, if you see a nice high grade card with a low bid, click and enlarge the photo. Guaranteed to be a qualifier attached that card.

[JP]

But....i'm pretty sure you can leave negative feedback, contrary to the seller's claim. So threaten to leave negative feedback unless he is willing to admit that he deceived through omission. You can read more about this in a thread here titled "auction description".

[ibuysportsephemera]

Can you provide a link to the listing please. I think that you will get better advice if this is provided.

Jeff

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Chicago206

That seller is full of doggy doo doo. I guarantee ebay did NOT tell him you cant leave a neg. Thats simply a bold faced lie. The seller doesnt want the card back, so he made up a story of how he talked to ebay and they said he did nothing wrong. Almost laughable!

Agreed. Ebay did not tell him that. File a SNAD with PayPal and you will win. Period.

[Robextend]

I just wanted to pose this question:

What is the reverse happened? The description was for a PSA 6-OC, but the picture was of a PSA 6. Then you get to the mailbox and it turns out to be a PSA 6-OC.

Is there any recourse for that?

I am not sure what could be done if anything, but I understand the gripe and I think the seller should be penalized for an incorrect title and description.

Rob

[quinnsryche]

Look before you leap. If the card pictured is the card you received, that's on you. He didn't mention the qualifier, but he sold and you bought a 6. If he has a stated no return policy (especially on graded cards) I think you will have to live and learn from this one. Don't be hasty in your purchases, better off asking questions, doing your research and losing the card than jumping the gun and making a mistake. Another one (whatever it is) will come along.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by quinnsryche

If he has a stated no return policy (especially on graded cards) I think you will have to live and learn from this one.

I agree with everything you said Tony, except the above shouldn't apply to every situation. In this case what was received was different from what was described. I have seen lots of listings with pictures that don't make any sense. I always do my research like you said to prevent any issues. But I still feel like the seller should assume some responsibility because he made a mistake as well.

[mintacular]

I would go the "raise some hell" route. The no return policy does not apply to SNAd claims. If he did not put the o/c in the title or description then he was lying by omission--this is NOT permissable. Get your refund, file a SNAD.

[Tcards-Please]

How is this any different than seeing a card graded BCCG 5? The seller states that it is a BCCG 5, provides a picture and you buy it. It arrives in your mailbox and you open it up and notice in print below the number that it says "Poor or Better". Now if the seller of the 6 (oc) didn't provide a picture, then that is a different story.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by T's please

How is this any different than seeing a card graded BCCG 5? The seller states that it is a BCCG 5, provides a picture and you buy it. It arrives in your mailbox and you open it up and notice in print below the number that it says "Poor or Better". Now if the seller of the 6 (oc) didn't provide a picture, then that is a different story.

In your example, the card is described and pictured accurately, however the buyer didn't know what he was buying. That falls back on the buyer.

In this situation (if I understand correctly), the card pictured did not match the description or title. That's where the SNAD (significantly not as described) claim comes in.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by T's please

How is this any different than seeing a card graded BCCG 5? The seller states that it is a BCCG 5, provides a picture and you buy it. It arrives in your mailbox and you open it up and notice in print below the number that it says "Poor or Better". Now if the seller of the 6 (oc) didn't provide a picture, then that is a different story.

I think the issue with BCCG's misleading grading structure is for a different thread. In this case there is a difference. The card was described as a PSA 6, not a PSA 6-OC...there obviously is a huge difference.

If someone is selling a BCCG 5, lists as such and provides a picture, it is up to the buyer to research what that means. The issue here is how the seller incorrectly listed his item and is apparently not at fault.

[nebboy]

Something very close happened to me on my last transaction on E-Bay.
Even know that the discription was not 100% correct (more like 75%) the buyer stated you will be recieving the card pictured. So I did give him only a 2 star feedback on discription and explained myself. I do take some of the blame for not slowing down and doing all my checks offs before buying.

Sorry to hear about your unhappy buy. We have hick-ups in our collecting past.

[H_T_Davis]

Thanks for all of the comments. Someone asked for the link, so now I have to expose myself as a naive credulous collector who buys cards both modern and cheap - the punishment never ends. Here is the address

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...=STRK:MEWNX:IT

Of course, now that I know the end result, the ONLY thing I see when I open the listing is that (oc) in the picture, but since this is not a rare card and not in premium condition, I just didn't notice it - what can I say other than lesson learned. I decided I wanted a PSA-6 or 7 example and have bid on quite a few, just waiting until I get one that isn't bid too high (May's cards seem to be going for abut half of the price listed in the Beckett Graded Card Investor, which would put my target at around $100). To address another comment, the bids were not particularly low for this card - I doubt anyone else noticed the (oc) either.

On a side note, since someone mentioned BCCG, the seller tried to explain that I got a great deal, by say that "I've researched this card and you couldn't buy one for less even a lower grade (5) good-very good and all are either off center or they are faded and have poor corners."

[Chicago206]

"On a side note, since someone mentioned BCCG, the seller tried to explain that I got a great deal,....."


Yeah, you got such a great deal that he wont take the card back even if it means you'll pay shipping both ways. Scumbag seller IMO.

[Jim VB]

Actual past selling prices show you paid a fair price for that card. A real PSA 6 would have set you back far more than $100 most of the time, according to VCP. You ultimate price was a little higher than, but closer to, a PSA 4.

[JP]

Neither title nor listing mentions the qualifier. 100% chance you'll win if you file a proper claim....Seller lied by omission.

[ibuysportsephemera]

I am a seller on eBay so I have no problem telling you to go after the seller.

If he didn't put the OC in the title but put it into the description I would say that it was on you the buyer...but the seller clearly was trying to get around the fact that there was a qualifier by not putting it into the description.

The seller is Top Rated, so by leaving feedback with 1 or 2 stars you can be costing him his 20% discount (assuming that the seller has 1 or 2 other customers that are not satisfied and also leave 1 or 2 stars).

Good luck.

Jeff

[jb217676]

He doesn't even mention 'OC' anywhere. He should have listed the grade and qualifier in the 'item specifics' section of the listing (didn't even list the numerical grade). Ebay has a spot for listing qualifiers. You would win this fight if you choose to do so.

[H_T_Davis]

Originally Posted by Jim VB

Actual past selling prices show you paid a fair price for that card. A real PSA 6 would have set you back far more than $100 most of the time, according to VCP. You ultimate price was a little higher than, but closer to, a PSA 4.

You may be right, as I haven't bought a PSA-6 of this card before, but for Mays cards (around 1957) purchases made this month, I've paid (based on the prices in the March/April Becket Graded Card Collector that I've using):

1954 Bowman 89 PSA5 - 53%
1958 Topps 5 PSA4 - 55%
1959 Topps 563 PSA7 - 44%
1959 Topps 50 SGC 86 - Hard to say, as there is a big jump between 7 and 8, but no worse than 79% and probably around 65%
1960 Topps 200 PSA5 - 55%

These percentages include shipping/handling/insurance. 1956 and before cards go higher (and exponentially so), mid-60's thru 73 go lower and weirder stuff much higher, usually.

Based on that, and a dozen or so more buys, if I was getting a deal, I didn't realize it at the time. It looked like I was right where I aimed to be - around 50%. My max bid was $88.89.

I'm on a HOFers from Alabama jag right now, working on the the post-war players since they have so many different cards. I have most of the Manushs and about half of the Sewells already, but am always on the lookout for more.

[Jim VB]

Beckett's is nothing more than a guide. And printed guides have built in problems with being timely.

I suggest you either search closed Ebay auctions (which only gives you 15 days of data) or use one of the services that gathers all that data and sorts it for you. I mentioned vintagecardprices.com, only because they are an advertiser here. There are a couple of others. They are a subscription service however.

[forazzurri2axz]

Buy three more of his items, and then NEG him on all 3!!!!!!!!!!!! Of course, some may think that's not the honest thing to do, but it's called what goes around ,comes around.

[JP]

Originally Posted by forazzurri2axz

Buy three more of his items, and then NEG him on all 3!!!!!!!!!!!! Of course, some may think that's not the honest thing to do, but it's called what goes around ,comes around.

Bill! Don't see you around these parts often...hope you're doing well!

If he can neg him on future auctions why can't he neg on this auction we're discussing, especially since it is justified?

[smtjoy]

Just file with ebay and you should win because the item was not as described.

If by chance you lose then neg him and leave 1 star for sure to warn the next buyer.

[glchen]

I'm a quasi-neophyte Ebayer also, but if this were me, I would just leave the seller neutral feedback, keep the card, and take it as a lesson learned. I've re-entered the hobby after collecting as a kid, so I've been reading these boards to gain more knowledge. However, one piece of advice that I've read frequently is "Buy the card, not the holder." You should have take a look at the card, and clearly seen that it was OC. When I purchase PSA cards on Ebay, I also do a cert verification from the PSA website for another level of authenticity check, and that is where you should have noticed that the card was OC. One final thing that I like to do is to do a search of Ebay for that same card, e.g., "1957 Topps Mays". Then I narrow down the display criteria to only those cards that are graded. On Ebay, you can get overcome by the feeling to want to "win" an auction and end up paying more than you need to, so when I do this search, I can get an idea of the top limit that I should have for this card since there are typically many other Buy Now cards that can give a rough idea of the market value of the card at this time.

It's easy to make mistakes on Ebay all of the time. I just bought a couple of cards that I have regrets on. Basically, you have a seller that is selling like 20 cards for a series that you want to collect, and each card's auction ends like 2 minutes apart. Therefore, you end up putting bids in w/o really looking at the card closely, and doing the proper research. This is what happens.

You can absolutely give the seller negative feedback. I'm sure Ebay would not stop you there. I would ding him a bit to neutral feedback, especially since the card was relatively inexpensive. Up to you, of course.

[H_T_Davis]

I filed a complaint and put the below in where it asked for a description of the seller's and my communications. I didn't notice a place where it actually asked for my specific complaint, so I tried to make it clear in that part. If there are any key phrases that I need to bring up, please let me know. Otherwise, thanks to everyone for helping we with this.

"I asked the seller to refund the auction price of the card (with me picking up both shipping fees) due to the fact that the card delivered is graded PSA-6 (OC) while the card described in the title and the text of the listing is described as a PSA-6. The card pictured in the listing is the card delivered and does indeed show the (OC) qualifier. That (OC) qualifier makes the card worth roughly 50% less than if the card was actually a PSA-6. I offered to eat the shipping costs as an incentive for him to accept the return, in spite of the fact that the only reason not to mention the (OC) is to hope that someone in a rush, like me, would not inspect the picture closely to verify that it matched the title and description. That is exactly what happened. The seller responded initally that he would speak with eBay customer service. In a second communication this morning, he explained that he has done nothing wrong, eBay says he has done nothing wrong, eBay says I won't be allowed to leave negative feedback and that he is not accepting the return. I responded that I would be initiating this complaint based on him making a conflicting listing and him delivering an item substantially different from that described in the listing. For the record, since a protracted official proceeding was what I was hoping to avoid by offering to pick up the shipping, I am no longer interested in offering that and wish to be reimbursed for all costs to me. Also, my complaint is not necessarily limited to the 2 issues communicated to him, but those were the only 2 that I mentioned in my message. All communications have been done through eBay, so you can see the entire history there."

And now, back to our regularly scheduled programming...

[Edwolf1963]

You've been given good feedback on both sides - I don't disagree with any of it really. If it doesn't bother you - keep the card. If it does, then file a "not as described" and you should definitely win. What I keep going back to, though, is all the bullsh!! editorial you were fed on the "I called eBay and they said.." and you can't do this and that crap. As noted earlier - that is a flat out lie .. and on top of the omitting the qualifier..?!?! To me, that's what makes this one smell

[iggyman]

Originally Posted by smtjoy

Just file with ebay and you should win because the item was not as described.

Roger! Roger on that!

Buyer has a little remorse and seller should oblige since he was misleading in his description. Book 'em, Danno!

-Lovely Day...


Of course, you would have ZERO recourse if this happened to you with an auction house.

[danc]

I think the fact that the seller says he talked to eBay and the advice he got from them puts him in the clear, is flat out deceptive as well.

Ask him who he talked to. I'm sure after your e-mail, the first thing he did was contact eBay.

Ebay is designed to side with the buyer. I have had issues where the buyer was clearly wrong, but you bite your lip and do what is right as a seller. You just add to that Blocked Bidder list.

You don't make up stories that persuade you not to leave negative feedback (Oh I would have already) and it speaks volumes about this seller.

You are correct (even though you should have seen the scan as other potential buyers probably saw), but anyways, him not making mention of OC is incorrect on his part.

Good luck.

DanC

[M's_Fan]

Can you post a pic of the card? I'm curious to see how "OC" it is.

[Jim VB]

He gave us a link in post #16.

[dennis]

how could you not see that that card is off center, if it was a psa 6 that would be ok? did you look at that card? or do you buy the holder? if there was no pic shame on the seller, but with the picture provided shame on you. i do not think that the item was described is significantly different....it's the item pictured,and thats what you got.

[D. Bergin]

I hate to point out the obvious, but isn't the photo part of the description?

Granted, the seller is acting a bit shady and a refund should have been given when asked for, but "significantly not as described" seems a bit of a stretch for me.

That said, do what you have to do to get your money back. I would hope you would voluntarily send the card back after Paypal refunds your purchase however.

Maybe I'm just a bit peeved after having a couple photos returned a few weeks ago. Guy called me up and said, these weren't what I was expecting. "Did you look at the nice big photos I provided in the auction description?". "No" he said.

"Ok, send them back and I'll refund you" I said, along with a polite request to take a good look at the pictures next time you bid.

[GrayGhost]

To me, tho the seller was being a bit "shifty" the entire description includes photos, so you should look at everything, description and photos, and not take the "written word" only. Obviously, you rushed, and were excited about maybe getting a good deal. I guess its a lesson learned.

[slidekellyslide]

I can't even imagine a scenario where I would just bid on an ebay auction without looking closely at the picture. The guy should have listed the card as OC, but it's so obvious that I don't see what your complaint is here.

[Tcards-Please]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

I can't even imagine a scenario where I would just bid on an ebay auction without looking closely at the picture. The guy should have listed the card as OC, but it's so obvious that I don't see what your complaint is here.

That was my point in my post. You can clearly see that the picture is off center. I guess the seller should have just provided a picture and said "this is the card you are receiving" and leave it at that.

[Kawika]

Plain as the balls on a tall dog. One look at the card and you're just splitting hairs about the lack of consistent verbiage in the description. Blame yourself, not the seller.
PS. No need apologize for collecting a '57 Topps Mays. One of the Hobby's iconic cards imho.

[ibuysportsephemera]

I agree with the last few posts that there is some responsibility by the buyer. However, IMO it is the job of the seller to disclose (in at least the description) that the card is oc. By not doing this he deserves to have an upset buyer. In this case I think that the seller is "more wrong than the buyer". Just this experienced eBay sellers 2¢.

[Mikehealer]

The item listing and description!! I didn't know you were supposed to read about the item. Just look at the pictures, saves a lot of time. By the way you got a nice card. Congratulations.

[H_T_Davis]

From the start, I have realized that this whole thing could have been avoided by my being more attentive and less hurried. The only thing that I'll say in my defense is that this is a commodity card, not some rare find in exceptional condition and I must have bid on a dozen before I won this one. And if another is up for sale tonight at the right price, I'll bid on it too. Not a justification, but an explanation why I apparently wasn't 100% focused on the task at hand. I clearly share the blame for this, which is why I offered to eat all of the shipping costs if he would take the card back. I would be penalized monetarily for not paying attention and he would lose nothing (unless he counts losing a sucker buyer as a loss, but that would take an admission on his part).

I don't hate oc cards, I hate being taken advantage of. Since I've been away for a while, I wanted to check here to see just how accepted this sort of stuff is nowadays and the many responses give me a feel for it. He used his cunning to get me to pay more for the card than it was worth. I'm going to use mine to try to get my money back.

[slidekellyslide]

You got the card that was pictured...I think it's a stretch to say that he used his cunning to get you to pay more. Obviously you paid one increment over the underbidder who I'm sure knew it was an OC or he would have bid a lot higher. IMO you got what you paid for.

All that said he should accept your return, but I think you should also pay his ebay fees.

[dennis]

" I would be penalized monetarily for not paying attention and he would lose nothing"
seller loses $83.00 that he would have gotten from the underbidder if you would have just looked at the card.

Is it not everyone here on this board the same people that say PSA qualifiers automatically knock off 2 grades. That means he over paid for the card. Although he should have looked closer, the seller should have disclosed this as it is a major factor when determining prices regardless.

[Jim VB]

Originally Posted by Pup6913

Is it not everyone here on this board the same people that say PSA qualifiers automatically knock off 2 grades. That means he over paid for the card. Although he should have looked closer, the seller should have disclosed this as it is a major factor when determining prices regardless.

Andrew,

Check VCP. He paid well under the average PSA 6 ($147), a little under an average PSA 5 ($87) , and about $19 over a PSA 4 ($63). The two grade thing is not an exact science.

[Chicago206]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

You got the card that was pictured...I think it's a stretch to say that he used his cunning to get you to pay more. Obviously you paid one increment over the underbidder who I'm sure knew it was an OC or he would have bid a lot higher. IMO you got what you paid for.

All that said he should accept your return, but I think you should also pay his ebay fees.

The seller will be refunded all the ebay fees on a returned item. There is NO excuse for this seller to not accept a return under the stated circumstances.

Originally Posted by Jim VB

Andrew,

Check VCP. He paid well under the average PSA 6 ($147), a little under an average PSA 5 ($87) , and about $19 over a PSA 4 ($63). The two grade thing is not an exact science.

Thanks Jim I had not looked at VCP. I guess if thats the case then the buyer should have no quams.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Chicago206

The seller will be refunded all the ebay fees on a returned item. There is NO excuse for this seller to not accept a return under the stated circumstances.

I didn't know that...I agree that if the buyer isn't happy and the seller is willing to pay for the return postage the seller should accept it back.....but I really have little sympathy for the buyer here. I don't care how much of a hurry he was in..it took me one second to notice the card was way off center. I also think the seller should put the complete grade in the title of the auction....I suppose if I collected PSA cards I'd like to have that information as I probably wouldn't even click on an auction for a common card with an OC qualifier.