NintendoAge http://nintendoage.com/forum/ -Sqooner Ebay Return - Item as undescribed qeusiton http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=179284 2018-01-21T12:39:36 -05.00 Tom Cruise 117
Other thing was Japanese famicom in box with original paperwork, early style power supply, rare flyers, & good pics of everything in detail. Console I got was totally different later version later serial number, newer power supply, no flyers. It was $92.55 shipped & I told seller reason I bought was for the early matching unit and stuff the set I got was pieced together. Seller was nicer in this case and I told him to send me the 3 flyers or refund $20 and I'd be ok with that so he said he sent flyers out but I'll believe it when I see it. He did go ahead and begin return for refund process so who knows. No way in hell I'd return it returning stuff more trouble than it's worth anyways & never know what lies they might use once item gets back. ]]> Ebay Return - Item as undescribed qeusiton http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=179284 2018-01-20T11:30:50 -05.00 Tom Cruise 117 Ebay Return - Item as undescribed qeusiton http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=179284 2018-01-19T16:28:13 -05.00 Tom Cruise 117 Originally posted by: CZroe
 
 

”Might” implies any chance between 100% and 0% and a user should expect any single unit “might” be used in that way (writing in the section intended for that). The exact rate is irrelevant. Whether or not it’s likely or unlikely is irrelevant. As long as there is a reasonable, non-zero chance then they “should expect [that it might].” Expecting a single used manual to have no writing just because 51% of them don’t is backwards. I can’t book a year-long time machine trip to some random year in the past decade and then claim that I deserve a refund because they didn’t tell me I might get a leap year which I can expect to get only 25% of the time. How’s that for a bad analogy?  

The standard here is set by strict interpretation of “used” and what constitues “intended use” whether or not most get used that way.
Let's imagine some arbitrary example where there is only a 1:100 chance that the high score pages would actually have been used.
Even if that was "intended use", it would be uncommon enough as to be note-worthy, since you have a very high probability of expecting it to NOT have been used in that way.



But if a significant percentage of people actually wrote in these manuals (while keeping them as nice looking as in the pictures!), then a buyer should probably know what to expect. 
Though likelihood absolutely factors into that expectation, and it seems a bit absurd to suggest otherwise.






But then again, with a seller who sells known collectibles and knows what they're selling, should probably also know something like writing in a manual MIGHT (   ) matter to a bunch of prospective buyers, to where it is worth their while to point it out in the description to avoid issues down the line. ]]> Ebay Return - Item as undescribed qeusiton http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=179284 2018-01-19T16:19:21 -05.00 Tom Cruise 117 Originally posted by: arch_8ngel
 
Originally posted by: CZroe

When games did not save their own progress/hi-scores and when hi-scores were the common goal I am sure that they were used a lot more, but until you could reasonably expect zero users to use that then you must expect that a "used" manual might be used in that way. Doesn't matter if it's 15% or 10% or 7% of users who use it.
The issue what what you're saying is that you are conflating "might" (which could be very very low chance) with "should expect" (which should imply "likely" or > 50%).
 
”Might” implies any chance between 100% and 0% and a user should expect any single unit “might” be used in that way (writing in the section intended for that). The exact rate is irrelevant. Whether or not it’s likely or unlikely is irrelevant. As long as there is a reasonable, non-zero chance then they “should expect [that it might].” Expecting a single used manual to have no writing just because 51% of them don’t is backwards. I can’t book a year-long time machine trip to some random year in the past decade and then claim that I deserve a refund because they didn’t tell me I might get a leap year which I can expect to get only 25% of the time. How’s that for a bad analogy?  

The standard here is set by strict interpretation of “used” and what constitues “intended use” whether or not most get used that way. ]]> Ebay Return - Item as undescribed qeusiton http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=179284 2018-01-19T16:13:26 -05.00 Tom Cruise 117 Originally posted by: arch_8ngel
 
Originally posted by: Ichinisan
 

 
When listing an item, eBay presents sellers with an option to specify whether-or-not returns are accepted. A message right there clearly says Byers can still return the item if it's not as described.

If the buyer wants more details about the nature of the use on a "used" item, then the buyer should ask before agreeing to the sale (a contract). 

 

I'd point out that if a seller wants to protect themselves from the risks of buyers using "not as described" as a defense, they shouldn't omit (seemingly obvious) things like writing in manuals.

I would be surprised if that could easily be characterized as an omitted flaw/imperfection that should have been disclosed should a buyer choose to raise the issue with eBay.



I'm sure somebody here has practical experience as to who eBay sides with in that case, and could clear it up.
 
That depends entirely on which ebay "agent" that gets escalated to, and what the Magic 8-Ball happens to tell them when they turn it over.


  ]]> Ebay Return - Item as undescribed qeusiton http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=179284 2018-01-19T16:03:12 -05.00 Tom Cruise 117 Originally posted by: Ichinisan
 

 
When listing an item, eBay presents sellers with an option to specify whether-or-not returns are accepted. A message right there clearly says Byers can still return the item if it's not as described.

If the buyer wants more details about the nature of the use on a "used" item, then the buyer should ask before agreeing to the sale (a contract). 

 
I'd point out that if a seller wants to protect themselves from the risks of buyers using "not as described" as a defense, they shouldn't omit (seemingly obvious) things like writing in manuals.

I would be surprised if that could easily be characterized as an omitted flaw/imperfection that should have been disclosed should a buyer choose to raise the issue with eBay.



I'm sure somebody here has practical experience as to who eBay sides with in that case, and could clear it up.





Anyway, I'm surprised that the general agreement is that sellers don't need to be bothered to disclose something like this.
It's not how I'd choose to act as a seller, and I wouldn't have expected it as the norm. ]]> Ebay Return - Item as undescribed qeusiton http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=179284 2018-01-19T15:56:41 -05.00 Tom Cruise 117 Originally posted by: arch_8ngel

I had the impression that "untested" and "as is" were not actually defensible arguments and that buyers were essentially always able to win a return on that type of auction.

It is like a seller claiming they don't allow returns -- eBay doesn't really care if you say that in your auction, because they'll force you to accept returns. 
(or at least, that seemed to be how it worked a couple years ago when I was still selling)

...
  When listing an item, eBay presents sellers with an option to specify whether-or-not returns are accepted. A message right there clearly says buyers can still return the item if it's not as described.

If the buyer wants more details about the nature of the use on a "used" item, then the buyer should ask before agreeing to the sale (a contract). 

  ]]> Ebay Return - Item as undescribed qeusiton http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=179284 2018-01-19T15:51:30 -05.00 Tom Cruise 117 Originally posted by: CZroe

When games did not save their own progress/hi-scores and when hi-scores were the common goal I am sure that they were used a lot more, but until you could reasonably expect zero users to use that then you must expect that a "used" manual might be used in that way. Doesn't matter if it's 15% or 10% or 7% of users who use it. The issue what what you're saying is that you are conflating "might" (which could be very very low chance) with "should expect" (which should imply "likely" or > 50%).



  ]]> Ebay Return - Item as undescribed qeusiton http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=179284 2018-01-19T15:50:43 -05.00 Tom Cruise 117 Originally posted by: Boosted52405

If you guys wanna get hung up on the word "imperfections", go for it. I am willing to bet that word could be used to argue a return on 90+% of "used" sales. You could literally find a microscopic wrinkle on an index page and demand a refund.

These items were used, as intended, and were described as such. They were not damaged from what I understand, just simply used as designed.

The real issue here is the OP being anal about what he purchased. The OP needs to understand that if they are to be this anal about purchases, they need to put some more diligence and effort into their buying process - ask the seller for more info if they are not confident/comfortable before bidding or hitting BIN. A transaction is a 2-way street. Not just defending the seller here, it also saves the buyer tons of hassle.

Buyers like this are one of the reasons so many people shy away from selling on eBay, it's impossible to satisfy everyone's individual expectations and eBay's buyer-centralized policies support the problem. This x1,000

  ]]> Ebay Return - Item as undescribed qeusiton http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=179284 2018-01-19T15:47:00 -05.00 Tom Cruise 117