eBay purchase question

  1. The Nordstrom Anniversary Sale 2019 Early Access is now open to Nordstrom card members! Please support TPF by using this link before shopping the sale. We're also giving away eight $200 gift cards to 8 lucky TPFers during the duration of the NAS! Find out more...
    Dismiss Notice
Our PurseForum community is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker. Thank you!
  1. Hi - some of you may know me from my crazy issue with a purchase last month - my very first bad eBay experience in 15+ years. This week I have experienced what I consider to be my second! I'm posting here to ask the eBay forum's opinion as to whether or not I am overreacting.

    I purchased a pair of pre-loved designer shoes for 1/3 of retail that looked beautiful in their eBay listing photos. The listing stated the shoes were worn on the soles from use, but there was "a lot of life left in them." However there was not a photograph of the bottom of the soles. I asked for a photo - plus asked if there were any issues - scuffs or marks I could not see in photos. The seller sent several new photos of ever other angle, but not one of the soles. She said to her eye they looked great with no marks she could see and somehow I purchased them anyway. (I know I know). The seller has been exceptionally nice.

    BUT.

    When they arrived a couple of days ago, I pulled out one shoe and was surprised to see how thin the sole was, but thought ok, I will resole soon anyway. I pulled out the second shoe - and it had a huge WAD of chewing gum stuck to the bottom. In addition to being horrified, it made me gag - and I haven't opened the box since. I asked the seller about it and she acted like it was no big deal and I could scrape it off (yet she said she was afraid she'd hurt the shoe if *she* tried to get it off). I decided to just take to a cobbler, but the more I think about it, the more upset I get. I would never send out an item in this state! I have written tonight and asked to return - or would consider to accept a partial refund to have a cobbler remove. As her listing states twice, she doesn't accept returns, so I feel I already know the answer. I dread the thought of another return debacle with eBay ...

    My question is - am I overreacting?
     
  2. In short no, I don't think you're overreacting. I think you should file a SNAD on the grounds that the shoes are not wearable without being re-soled, because if the soles are as thin as you say they don't "have a lot of life left in them". I agree the chewing gum is disgusting, I wouldn't dream of sending anything out like that. Best of luck!

    The other thing is that you don't know what the chewing gum is covering up - there might be a hole under there.
     

  3. Yikes, you're right. Thank you!

    Seller is asking me to work directly with her but wants me to pay shipping so she can keep some promo coupon eBay sent. Frustrating.
     
  4. You are not overreacting. That is truly disgusting. I would want to return the shoes and get a full refund, to be perfectly honest. I do not think this applies as no returns-it is definitely SNAD, especially since she was trying to hide what the bottom of the shoes actually looked like.
     
  5. If the shoes were listed as used EBay may side with the seller. Especially as you chose to purchase without the requested pictures.
     

  6. Even with a big wad of chewing gum with dirt and debris on the bottom?
     
  7. #7 Jun 11, 2016
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2016


    Sorry you have a SNAD here... I might consider reaching out to the
    seller again to see if she will refund, if not just file & take your chances.
    It is worth a shot & if you do file, you can also send a "picture"
    of the shoe shipped to you. Hopefully your messages are thru ebay,
    so they can read the communication with her response

    Shipping shoes with a big wad of chewing gum is a misrepresentation
    of condition to say the least, IMO

    No wonder she din't send a photo of the sole... You would have seen
    that & probably not gone ahead with the transaction...SMH that a
    "seller" would ship out a pair of shoes like that
     
  8. My humble guess here is that you have a wonderful SNAD case. It's what I would do.
     

  9. Yes.

    I know that it is nice to be told what you want to hear, but in reality Ebay is very inconsistent in how they resolve things. This is a recent thread http://forum.purseblog.com/ebay-forum/item-not-as-described-fiasco-943187.html. A search of the forum will bring up more. Did you see it coming when Ebay sided with the 'hacked' seller?

    IMO it is hard to give advice without seeing the listing (or the gum), but you stated that they were pre loved. I was just assuming that the seller listed them as used. You stated that you asked about scrapes and scuffs and that the seller said there were none. Since you didn't mention any I will also have to assume that that part is correct also.
    When you requested specific photos and they weren't supplied you went ahead and purchased them any way. The seller could just as easily argue that you were satisfied with her correspondence regarding the description----hence the purchase. She did after all mention that there was wear on the soles.
    Should she have disclosed the gum? Yes. Should you probably have hit the back button when you did not receive the photos you requested? Again, yes. Will Ebay have your back on this if you do decide to file? Anybody's guess. Will other posters rush to tell you how wrong I am? Absolutely.
    If the shoes were a good deal and you were going to resole them any way just leave appropriate feedback.
     
  10. This seller clearly held back info on what would have prevented you from purchasing. How can people be so deceitful?! CHEWING GUM of all things? Ew!

    I would return or file a SNAD case asap!
     
  11. While ebay has been know to give conflicting info, the OP has a 50/50
    shot of winning this dispute.Why not go for it?

    If the seller is no longer being cooperative, the OP should file.

    While condition maybe subjective for many, "chewing gum" doesn't seem
    to fall into that category.
     
  12. Absolutely agree. OP has nothing to lose by filing.
     
  13. Do you have an update??
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice