My Ebay Hantek Buying Hell

[gore]

I think at this point the best thing you can do to clear this mess is to pay the £16, which is much less than what you would usually pay to customs.

[Monkeh]

Just to clarify.....

Anyone selling through ebay AS A BUSINESS is subject to the DSR / CRA.

It doesn't matter if the seller is in the north pole - if they are trading through Ebay.co.uk and selling to customers in the UK, no matter where in the world their business is, they are subject to and bound by those regulations. Even ebay are ultimately bound by and governed by those regulations - as are ANY businesses trading through ebay.co.uk. The seller can write no returns etc all over their listing but those terms mean absolutely nothing when wieghed against the DSR and CRA. Anyone selling to the UK should be FULLY versed in these regulations.

Auctions are a slightly different matter but I didn't deal with an auction - I dealt with buy it now which brings the DSR and CRA into play

The seller and ebay can print whatever terms and small print they like but the DSR and the consumer rights act will always take precedent. That's what they were created for.
Anyone wishing to contact trading standards or Citizens advice can verify this.

Like I said, I can cancel. No reason needed. None of this "it's a binding contract" or "it's up to the seller's good will" nonsense.

I could set up a shop tomorrow and fill my terms and conditons with things like once you click buy it's yours, no refunds, no warranty etc but ultimately these mean naff all.


Taken from Citizens Advice:

If you bought the item online, over the phone or by mail order

You automatically get a 14-day ‘cooling-off period’ when you buy something you haven’t seen in person - unless it’s bespoke or made to measure.

The cooling-off period starts as soon as you receive your order, and there doesn’t need to be anything wrong with the item for you to get a refund.

You won’t get a cooling-off period when you buy:

    something that deteriorates quickly - like flowers or food
    an item that was personalised or custom-made for you
    anything from a private individual rather than a business
    a CD, DVD or software, if you break the seal on the wrapping

If you paid for standard delivery when you bought something, the seller has to refund this if you return it. If you chose a more expensive delivery option, you'll have to pay the difference.
Use your cooling-off period

You need to tell the seller you don’t want the item within 14 days of receiving it. Once you’ve told the seller, you’ve got another 14 days to actually send the item back.

You can use our template letter to let the seller know you’re cancelling. Keep a copy so you’ve got proof you sent it.

You could also phone - but make sure you make a note of who you speak to and what was agreed. It’s a good idea to follow up with a letter or email.

Sellers must give you certain information when you buy something without seeing it in person. This includes their business address and phone number, and details of your right to cancel. If you didn’t get this in writing (they’re allowed to send it by email) then your cooling off period is increased even further, to a year and 14 days.

14 days is the absolute minimum cooling-off period that a seller must give you. Make sure you check the terms and conditions in case they’ve given you more time to change your mind - many choose to do so.


 

Claptrap.

If I introduced you to a company in the US and said 'here, use my phone to make an order', you think the DSR would apply?

Hint: They wouldn't.

[rich]

Mikey, this thread probably isn't turning out how you'd pictured it would. I think it's fair to conclude you feel your views are 100% justified, and that everyone else's views are 100% wrong. That's ok, everyone is entitled to their opinion - ultimately it is you who has to choose which actions to take next and then deal with the consequences.

A lot of the flack you have taken in this thread though isn't about the cancelation-request/dispatch overlap question specifically but is actually a reaction to 3 things: how you presented yourself; your approach to resolving the unfolding situation; and disrespecting other peoples opinions.

Surely the goal is to have a DSO5102B in your hands and enjoy using it? Everything else is a distraction.

Most people would pay DHL and start enjoying the scope. It's the simplest way out of the hole and it is what would have happened if you hadn't have had doubts. I don't understand why this still wouldn't be an amicable solution for you and so your actions and defensive posts paint a picture of wanting to pursue this as a point of principle to show you're "right" and not to be messed with. That's your choice, it's not what I'd have done.

We could civilly discuss the distance selling regulations, international trade, the seller's actions, etiquette around chargebacks and a whole host of other aspects of buying locally vs internationally, but you came in all guns blazing and chose not to take that route. C'est la vie.

[Mark]

What a moanbag.  Must be a troll post.  Must be.  Or maybe forgot to take his pills this morning? 

[timb]

Mikey, sorry, you're wrong. You don't have any right of return when purchased from a company in China. They sell through eBay.com, with a worldwide listing. EU laws *do not* apply.

Cancel the chargeback. Pay the €16. Use the scope.

Or, keep digging your hole.

Either way. (Though, if you chose the latter, I hope a representative from your bank finds this thread when researching the chargeback, laughs at you, declines it and then closes your bank account. Now *that* would be funny. Talk about just desserts.)

The OP is the bank's customer--they make good money out of him.
If they decline  the chargeback,that is one thing,but why would they close his account?

Over the last 30 or so years,an idea has grown up that banks are somehow doing you a favour,in accepting your business.
From that has come the habit of charging extortionate fees to operate accounts,penalties for "insufficient funds" refusals which are out of proportion to the real costs involved,etc.

The latter is,thankfully being addressed in Australia,where banks look like having to repay millions of dollars.

Relax. It was a joke. (The irony being the card issuer screwing him over by keeping all the money in his account, just like he's trying to screw over the seller. Obviously that wouldn't happen though.)

Also, when a bank extends you a line of credit, or gives you a loan, they kind of *are* doing you a favor. They don't *have* to give you that money. (Though, when you place your hard earned money in a savings account, you are doing *them* a favor, and to return that favor they *pay you* a small percentage; though with a checking account they don't, but instead provide all the infrastructure needed to use it, so it evens out.)

Here in the US, we have a popular concept called Credit Unions. They're like a bank, only the members actually own it (by virtue of keeping their money there) which legally makes them shareholders. The members can vote at board meetings, set bylaws, etc. It's like if a bank and non-profit organization got together and had a baby. No outrageous fees, high interest on savings accounts and CDs, no-fee checking, low interest mortgages and loans, etc.

[Macbeth]

What a moanbag.  Must be a troll post.  Must be.  Or maybe forgot to take his pills this morning?

Clearly a troll.

The "must get a bargain" Hantek from China, for £250 ex VAT and import fees, vs a Rigol DS1054Z from a UK distributor for £299 including VAT, and then insisting on wanting to pay the full whack to HMRC after the seller marked down the CN22... Oh come on! Then moaning about a couple of days difference when timezones are way out... and the well known Chinese New Year. WTF?

Too easy. When I said gr8 b8 m8 (Great Bait Mate) in my previous post I thought it would end it, but some people clearly like feeding trolls. 

If this guy really is genuine then god forbid Farnell who sell him a 555 timer and the spaztard can't get it to flash his LED. I bet he gets his personal Queen's Counsel high court barrister onto them.

[Fungus]

I'm with the seller as well, but I was under the impression that if the seller hadn't shipped it yet and canceled the sale, that all the Ebay and Paypal fees are returned. I did this for a buyer several months ago and that was the case then, anyway...

Maybe.

But in that case a seller can get the buyer's real email from paypal, agree to a payment outside eBay, cancel the sale, avoid eBay fees.

(assuming the buyer agrees)

[rch]

I'm with the seller as well, but I was under the impression that if the seller hadn't shipped it yet and canceled the sale, that all the Ebay and Paypal fees are returned. I did this for a buyer several months ago and that was the case then, anyway...

Maybe.

But in that case a seller can get the buyer's real email from paypal, agree to a payment outside eBay, cancel the sale, avoid eBay fees.

(assuming the buyer agrees)

People can do that anyway;   sellers smuggle their mobile number into listings, or on their Ebay shop site. But the buyer has to be brave or know the sender to do without Ebay or Paypal protection.  I did this recently, not because I wanted to cheat Ebay but because I wanted to make an offer on something with two failed auctions, and a decent-sounding seller.   We ended up paying by Paypal because the seller preferred this and I dare say they had to pay Ebay fees, but they could have chosen not to, especially if they had their own credit card merchant account.

[rch]

I don't know why people think the EU can't enforce consumer protection against foreign companies. (Especially people from countries that go around the world telling other countries who they can and can't  trade with, and extraditing bankers who have never been to America.)

There is some doubt whether courts in the more backward foreign countries would enforce EU law as they should if they were honest;   but in this case both  Ebay UK and the banks involved are clearly under EU jurisdiction, so Mikey would win his case without ever going to a lawyer.  There is *no doubt* about this.

However, he wasn't buying a pair of shoes from a multinational;   he was buying an expensive device from a small trader in China:

Maybe the seller tricked him by sending the item after he cancelled, but he couldn't prove it, and it is really much more likely he had already set the delivery in motion.  Since Ebay makes the DSR rules clear to buyers (they really do -  read the Ebay UK site any one from other English speaking countries who doesn't believe the rules apply to foreign businesses!)   then Mikey is bound to pay return costs if the item is delivered.  He wouldn't be so obliged if the seller (or his agent) hadn't told him about these costs.

Either Mikey will have to pay £100 for tracked return delivery, or DHL will return the goods and probably charge the seller a huge sum.  In neither case would it be fair, for different reasons.


If I was the OP, I'd give the seller the benefit of the doubt that he acted honourably and was not able to cancel when he received the cancellation.   Amazon often do the same, and tell you after you cancel that their systems are irreversible and you will have to send the stuff back or refuse to accept delivery.

So in this case if he insists on a refund, someone is going to lose a huge sum of money compared to the value of the scope, and it is *just not worth it*.   

So please give in, despite the fact you *undoubtedly* have the legal right to cancel, and accept the delivery.

[ebastler]

I don't know why people think the EU can't enforce consumer protection against foreign companies.

So would you have a reference supporting that? Which EU directive or national law stipulates that the EU consumer rights apply when the seller is based outside of the EU? (It might well be true. But just repeating that it is "undoubtedly" so does not count as a reference.  )

[rch]

I don't know why people think the EU can't enforce consumer protection against foreign companies.

So would you have a reference supporting that? Which EU directive or national law stipulates that the EU consumer rights apply when the seller is based outside of the EU? (It might well be true. But just repeating that it is "undoubtedly" so does not count as a reference.  )

I can't find the text of the regulations at the moment, but this is Ebay's take on it, which is most relevant in the circumstances.  If I find the directive I'll post that later.


http://sellercentre.ebay.co.uk/legal-considerations-when-selling-internationally#rights

[RobertBG]

What a moanbag.  Must be a troll post.  Must be.  Or maybe forgot to take his pills this morning?

Clearly a troll.

The "must get a bargain" Hantek from China, for £250 ex VAT and import fees, vs a Rigol DS1054Z from a UK distributor for £299 including VAT, and then insisting on wanting to pay the full whack to HMRC after the seller marked down the CN22... Oh come on! Then moaning about a couple of days difference when timezones are way out... and the well known Chinese New Year. WTF?

Too easy. When I said gr8 b8 m8 (Great Bait Mate) in my previous post I thought it would end it, but some people clearly like feeding trolls. 

If this guy really is genuine then god forbid Farnell who sell him a 555 timer and the spaztard can't get it to flash his LED. I bet he gets his personal Queen's Counsel high court barrister onto them.

Well said but if he's not a troll then hopefully the next time he hears a conversation about what's wrong with people today and their sense of entitlement.....................I hope that he knows that he is the problem they are talking about

Last but not least if he's for real it's going to bite him in the ass in the end big time.So let him be

[vk6zgo]

Mikey, sorry, you're wrong. You don't have any right of return when purchased from a company in China. They sell through eBay.com, with a worldwide listing. EU laws *do not* apply.

Cancel the chargeback. Pay the €16. Use the scope.

Or, keep digging your hole.

Either way. (Though, if you chose the latter, I hope a representative from your bank finds this thread when researching the chargeback, laughs at you, declines it and then closes your bank account. Now *that* would be funny. Talk about just desserts.)

The OP is the bank's customer--they make good money out of him.
If they decline  the chargeback,that is one thing,but why would they close his account?

Over the last 30 or so years,an idea has grown up that banks are somehow doing you a favour,in accepting your business.
From that has come the habit of charging extortionate fees to operate accounts,penalties for "insufficient funds" refusals which are out of proportion to the real costs involved,etc.

The latter is,thankfully being addressed in Australia,where banks look like having to repay millions of dollars.

Relax. It was a joke. (The irony being the card issuer screwing him over by keeping all the money in his account, just like he's trying to screw over the seller. Obviously that wouldn't happen though.)

Also, when a bank extends you a line of credit, or gives you a loan, they kind of *are* doing you a favor. They don't *have* to give you that money. (Though, when you place your hard earned money in a savings account, you are doing *them* a favor, and to return that favor they *pay you* a small percentage; though with a checking account they don't, but instead provide all the infrastructure needed to use it, so it evens out.)

They are still providing a service for reward-----they can decide to extend you a line of credit,or not,but once they have done so,they are not in any way different from McDonald's or any other trader.

Here in the US, we have a popular concept called Credit Unions. They're like a bank, only the members actually own it (by virtue of keeping their money there) which legally makes them shareholders. The members can vote at board meetings, set bylaws, etc. It's like if a bank and non-profit organization got together and had a baby. No outrageous fees, high interest on savings accounts and CDs, no-fee checking, low interest mortgages and loans, etc.

We used to have Credit Unions,too,but the laws were changed,making it easier to become a bank.
If you weren't careful,you would have been trampled in the rush of CUs to become banks.

Great for the "Suits",as they got nice new offices & big salaries----not so good for the members,who got shares in the new bank,which give minimal return.
Most of them then merged with existing banks,until you ended up a customer of some bank you'd never heard of.

[Mikey2016]

What a moanbag.  Must be a troll post.  Must be.  Or maybe forgot to take his pills this morning?

Clearly a troll.

The "must get a bargain" Hantek from China, for £250 ex VAT and import fees, vs a Rigol DS1054Z from a UK distributor for £299 including VAT, and then insisting on wanting to pay the full whack to HMRC after the seller marked down the CN22... Oh come on! Then moaning about a couple of days difference when timezones are way out... and the well known Chinese New Year. WTF?

Too easy. When I said gr8 b8 m8 (Great Bait Mate) in my previous post I thought it would end it, but some people clearly like feeding trolls. 

If this guy really is genuine then god forbid Farnell who sell him a 555 timer and the spaztard can't get it to flash his LED. I bet he gets his personal Queen's Counsel high court barrister onto them.

Really? Name calling and personal insults? How mature.

What a moanbag.  Must be a troll post.  Must be.  Or maybe forgot to take his pills this morning?

Clearly a troll.

The "must get a bargain" Hantek from China, for £250 ex VAT and import fees, vs a Rigol DS1054Z from a UK distributor for £299 including VAT, and then insisting on wanting to pay the full whack to HMRC after the seller marked down the CN22... Oh come on! Then moaning about a couple of days difference when timezones are way out... and the well known Chinese New Year. WTF?

Too easy. When I said gr8 b8 m8 (Great Bait Mate) in my previous post I thought it would end it, but some people clearly like feeding trolls. 

If this guy really is genuine then god forbid Farnell who sell him a 555 timer and the spaztard can't get it to flash his LED. I bet he gets his personal Queen's Counsel high court barrister onto them.

Well said but if he's not a troll then hopefully the next time he hears a conversation about what's wrong with people today and their sense of entitlement.....................I hope that he knows that he is the problem they are talking about

Last but not least if he's for real it's going to bite him in the ass in the end big time.So let him be

Yes, I exercised my consumer rights under the distance selling regulations and I'm the biggest problem in the world today.
Never mind that I tried to cancel the purchase before any damage was done and was quite prepared to settle the matter long before the item ever got into the hands of DHL.

Not my fault the seller couldn't be straight or reasonable enough to work out a solution where neither party fell out of pocket. The fact that it was chinese new year has naff all to do with anything. If the seller was away then he should have stated this like other sellers do. E.g this seller is away until XXX and may not respond.

The seller could have replied to my cancellation request and informed me of the facts and we could have worked it out from there - but didn't.

And yes I was quite prepared to pay the full import duty with the actual price stated on the customs declaration. I have stated this all along. I would have preferred the full value stated.
Why is that so hard for peoplel to grasp? Just because I buy something cheap doesn't mean I'm a scammer or dishonest as people are trying to imply. So my budget for the item was £250. What does that prove? People seem to assume that's all the money I own in the world. That was the price I set for the item itself. Where did I say I couldn't afford the duty payments?

It seems it's okay to be dishonest when it's supposedly in my favour such as wrongly decalring the value of the item to customs but when I try to exercise my legal rights I'm a horrible customer and I'm dishonest and a "spaztard" out to rip off the seller who hardly has the best track record for honesty. It really does make me laugh!
I'm supposedly the problem with the world today and yet people can cherry pick and post on this thread about what is and isn't honest and righteous... Hahaha yeah right.

So it's okay to comit customs fraud and put them out of pocket because it's suposedly in my favor but try to exercise my legal rights and I'm a dishonest ebay scammer that's out on a mission to solely rip of chinese sellers because they're thousands of miles away.

Pfft. I'm selling moral compasses on ebay soon if anyone wants to buy any?

Nobody is out to get anything more than they were entitled to. I'd be quite happy if the item went back and nobody was out of pocket. I would prefer that. No doubt someone will try twisting that round to state I'm out to rip off all the sellers on ebay and that I'm a scammer.

Just to recap these ARE the facts:

1. I made a mistake by ordering and then later re-considering based on the stories I'd read about warranty problems and problems ordering from China in THIS thread: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hantek-tekway-dso-hack-get-200mhz-bw-for-free/ which I'd found while researching hantek in general and where I came across information for my friends Rigol hack.

2. I contacted the seller prior to the item being shipped to ask for a cancellation - something I have the right to do. I tried within reasonable time to halt the sale before any damage was done NOT to rip anyone off or circumvent customs.

3. The seller responded stating the item had been shipped when in fact it had only just been booked with DHL for collection and wasn't collected til 2 days later. The seller could have asked me to re-imburse any fees etc but didn't. That option or opportunity was never presented. I was told the item had been dispatched and that was the end of it.

4. My budget of £250 was for the item I never said anything about not being prepared to pay the full import amount for customs had the item been properly decalred. This has been assumed.
My complaint with the £16 ransom was purely because had the seller worked with me to resolve the cancellation before the item was shipped, I wouldn't have had to pay it at all.
So what if I opted to pay for a cheap chinese scope? What does that prove other than I didn't want to spend a massive amount on the item itself. At the time when I first made the transaction I was quite prepared to pay whatever in legal customs fees. I'm NOT a thief nor a fraudster as some keep advocating I should be by falsely declaring goods values to customs!

In the end, I wanted to back out - something I know to be my rights to do in THIS country. Nothing wrong with that despite what people think. If the rights are on my side, deal with it.
If it was buyer's remorse it was only fueled by a post that I read on THIS forum and is what made me reconsider buying from China in the end. £250 might not be a lot to some people but in the end I thought more about it and could forsee problems should anything be wrong with or go wrong with the unit. I decided in the end to find a UK seller where I wouldn't have problems despite what people say I would have an easier time dealing with a UK seller if problems were to occur.

Twist it round however you want to - keep on getting your panties in a twist - I really could care less. I know what happened, I know I'm an honest person - I'm not the one cherry picking and telling people certain dishonest practices are acceptible but honest ones like exercising ones legal rights are not. And people have the bottle to tell me I'M what's wrong with the world.. Seriously?
And as for caring about digntiy and credibilty on a forum full of people trying to tell me that breaking laws in my favour is okay? Bwahahahahahaha 

Don't worry, I'll be sure to keep y'all updated. Have a nice day now! 

[gore]

Perhaps the seller was late a day or two, but that's just maybe for all the reasons stated above in this thread. You always have to take such things in consideration when buying anything, really. If you can't afford waiting a little longer - don't commit. I'm not saying that's the way it should be, but that's  the way reality is. But you, as a buyer, are in the wrong as well for being indecisive. Once you agree to buy the item on Bay by clicking the button - that's it. You keep hanging on these principles of honesty and law abiding. Well, that's great, but how do you solve any of the problems at this point? You have the option to easily solve it by paying a smaller fee than what was originally planned and get the damn scope you want. No laws will help you to clear this nonsense up. Just be reasonable and admit that both of you messed up but only one side can resolve this.

[rch]

Let's wrap everything into one question:

Forget your idealism and "rights", no one honors them if there are no related consequences. Let's say. the seller fucked you up (even if he did so), and VISA already processed the order, and he got his money in his Chinese account, what can you do? Charge him and spend $2000 on air ticket and another $2000 on a translator with specialty in law and another $2000 on lawyers? Even you did all of them, eBay will not protect you because he did all what eBay wanted him to do. eBay does not belong to EU, so EU laws does not make any difference. You want to charge eBay HQ in the US? Then prepare another $4000, this time you do not need a translator, though.

If you can not do them, then accept it and shut up.

Ignoring the rights and wrongs of the case (where I largely do agree with you), sufficient of Ebay's assets exist in  the EU that they do have to obey EU rules!   See my link quoted above:

http://sellercentre.ebay.co.uk/legal-considerations-when-selling-internationally#rights

[Gyro]

Anyway, I'm outta here. Have fun debating it.

Cheers.

 

[ebastler]

Ignoring the rights and wrongs of the case (where I largely do agree with you), sufficient of Ebay's assets exist in  the EU that they do have to obey EU rules!   See my link quoted above:

http://sellercentre.ebay.co.uk/legal-considerations-when-selling-internationally#rights

The strange part here is that I could not find any hint of those ebay rules on their US site (chosen as an example for a non-European ebay site where I can understand the language). If the EU laws apply to non-EU sellers, shouldn't ebay make them aware of those regulations? Those sellers will most likely will place their offers via their local ebay site, but may want to enable showing them on international sites. So all they ever read is the information on their local ebay site, which does not talk about EU consumer rights at all. In fact, the US site advises sellers that a return option can make their offers more attractive to buyers, but that they may want to limit or remove the return option for international sales.   I am honestly confused to which transactions the EU regulations apply...

However, I learned something else in the meantime, which makes the whole discussion totally moot in the present case: Ebay seller "ameliazhou", whom Mikey bought the scope from, explicitly offers a 20-day return period for each ebay sale! Seller to pay return shipping, money back, transaction cancelled, ebay fees refunded; all explained in each of their ebay offers. By the way, the seller seems to have 550 articles on offer at ebay.com right now. Edit: Not sure about that; the search results announce "550 items", but only display a much shorter list.

Hence, (a) I have no idea at all what Mikey has ever been nervous about; and (b) the seller seems to run a reasonably large and professional operation, and has probably figured in the overhead labor/cost for the occasional return. I would still recommend Mikey to pay the import duties and enjoy his scope, but if he absolutely wants to return it, so be it.

[rch]

However, I learned something else in the meantime, which makes the whole discussion totally moot in the present case: Ebay seller "ameliazhou", whom Mikey bought the scope from, explicitly offers a 20-day return period for each ebay sale! Seller to pay return shipping, money back, transaction cancelled, ebay fees refunded; all explained in each of their ebay offers. By the way, the seller seems to have 550 articles on offer at ebay.com right now. Edit: Not sure about that; the search results announce "550 items", but only display a much shorter list.

However, the problem is:

a) if the OP accepts the scope and returns it, he won't get his £16 handling fee back and it will cost him perhaps half what he paid for the scope for tracked delivery to China;


or b) if he refuses to accept delivery we have no idea whether the various couriers (DHL may only be delivery agent) will return the item to sender or how much they will charge the seller for doing so.


The *law* is on the buyer's  side (and Ebay UK will enforce it whatever Ebay US says) so if he refuses delivery (and DHL don't just dump it over his garden fence and sue him for the the £16!) he is probably entitled to all his money back.  This seems tremendously unfair on the seller.


The distance selling regulations were designed to help stop exploitation of naive buyers by sellers of junk, and put people in the same position as if they had a chance to look at goods in a shop.  Allowing people to reject well-described goods that don't need inspecting (as there are plenty of details on the Internet, including reviews) just increases costs for all of us.  This is entirely separate from the right to reject mis-described or broken goods which is part of contract law most places and Ebay will generally protect buyers.

So what I am saying is that the OP is entirely within his rights to do what he proposes, but the consequences of this sort of behaviour is bad for EU buyers in general, as we will all end up paying for the extra costs sellers sustain.

[Fungus]

Hence, (a) I have no idea at all what Mikey has ever been nervous about; and (b) the seller seems to run a reasonably large and professional operation, and has probably figured in the overhead labor/cost for the occasional return.

I just checked them out.

Over 6500 sales, 99.2% positive feedback. Very nice, professionally done listings.

On the listings it says:

Promise
         
    Brand new and from original factory
             
    We offer three years warranty
             
    We re-tested and enhanced packaging before shipment
           
    Because of your trust, we will do better

Also:

Terms of sales
1. You have 20 days to contact us and 20 days to return it from the date it was received. If this item is in your possession more than 20 days, it is considered used and WE WILL NOT ISSUE YOU A REFUND OR REPLACEMENT.
2. All returned items MUST BE in the original packaging and you MUST PROVIDE us with the shipping tracking number, specific reason for the return, and your eBay ID.
3. We will refund YOUR FULL WINNING BID AMOUNT, upon receipt of the item in its original condition and packaging with all components and accessories included, AFTER BOTH Buyer and Seller cancel the transaction from eBay. OR, you may choose to have a replacement.
4. Return shipping is to be paid by the Buyer.

That's about as good as it gets, really.

[ebastler]

The *law* is on the buyer's  side (and Ebay UK will enforce it whatever Ebay US says) so if he refuses delivery (and DHL don't just dump it over his garden fence and sue him for the the £16!) he is probably entitled to all his money back.  This seems tremendously unfair on the seller.

Now you've lost me. Let's leave the non-EU seller aspect aside and assume that the EU regulations apply. If refusing delivery means that DHL returns the item to the seller without charging him extra for the return trip, then the financial impact for the seller is just the same as if the buyer had sent the goods back. If, on the other hand, DHL applies a surcharge for returning the refused shipment, then the buyer clearly has to pay that charge, as return shipping is to be paid by the buyer. Hence, with regard to shipping costs, refusing delivery should be equivalent to accepting it and sending it back, as far as the seller's costs are concerned.

Not sure what DHL would do with the import duties. I assume the actual tax would be refunded if the item is re-exported after deliver was refused, but DHL may still charge their processing fee (or even twice the fee). One could debate whether or not that fee is part of the original shipping cost, and who should pay for it...

[rsjsouza]

1. I made a mistake by ordering and then later re-considering

First mistake. Despite several "first world countries" allow for "buyer's remorse", most of them do not. I personally have never seen a return of a product in my life before moving to US.

2. I contacted the seller prior to the item being shipped to ask for a cancellation - something I have the right to do. I tried within reasonable time to halt the sale before any damage was done NOT to rip anyone off or circumvent customs.

That is not your right on an international sale; at most this is a favour the seller will do to you.

3. The seller responded stating the item had been shipped when in fact it had only just been booked with DHL for collection and wasn't collected til 2 days later. The seller could have asked me to re-imburse any fees etc but didn't. That option or opportunity was never presented. I was told the item had been dispatched and that was the end of it.

As others have stated, you don't know how the operation goes; not everyone that sells on eBay packages products by themselves. Also, I have experienced in the past courier companies collect items and then ship them a day or two later - in the US!

4. My budget of £250 was for the item I never said anything about not being prepared to pay the full import amount for customs had the item been properly decalred. This has been assumed.
My complaint with the £16 ransom was purely because had the seller worked with me to resolve the cancellation before the item was shipped, I wouldn't have had to pay it at all.

As probably others have pointed out as well, the use of the word "ransom" is inappropriate and opens the door to the interpretation of dishonesty you clearly dislike. DHL is transferring to you something they already paid (customs duties), not holding your oscilloscope against your will in exchange for money.

In the end, I wanted to back out - something I know to be my rights to do in THIS country. Nothing wrong with that despite what people think. If the rights are on my side, deal with it.

See number 1 above. What is right in your country may or may not be in others. eBay and Paypal have a system (broken or not, open for debate) that imposes some rules for transactions done internationally, but regret is not one of them.

If it was buyer's remorse it was only fueled by a post that I read on THIS forum and is what made me reconsider buying from China in the end. £250 might not be a lot to some people but in the end I thought more about it and could forsee problems should anything be wrong with or go wrong with the unit. I decided in the end to find a UK seller where I wouldn't have problems despite what people say I would have an easier time dealing with a UK seller if problems were to occur.

I agree with you that local sellers would potentially give you less headache. On the other hand, UK sellers will charge a lot more to comply with the local law and guarantee "buyer's remorse", warranty, labor to process, package and ship - things that will be reflected in the cost of the product. That is the main reason people focused on the £250 - in UK you wouldn't be able to get a product at this cost (as per other reports) and decided to make an international transaction that, unbeknownst to you, is stripped from most of these.

Twist it round however you want to - keep on getting your panties in a twist - I really could care less. I know what happened, I know I'm an honest person - I'm not the one cherry picking and telling people certain dishonest practices are acceptible but honest ones like exercising ones legal rights are not.

I don't think you are dishonest. What I think is that you need to expand how you see the world before doing international transactions.

All in all, as others have said: swallow your pride, listen to the arguments presented here by almost everyone and distill in your mind that you are turning a seamless transaction into a pit of trouble. As Fraser pointed out nicely, life will teach you time and again to get some perspective in what really matters.

[StuUK]

Maybe the OP is busy playing with his new scope 

[Fraser]

Oh Dear,

I see Mike continues on his quest for 'justice'.

Time for me to bow out of this thread, it's a waste of time and seems to now be just a silly squabble over rights of return. I have wasted enough time trying to convince Mike on the sensible path forward.

You can lead a horse to water and all that.

Time to get on with more productive matters.

Fraser

[rich]

@Mikey2016 my last comment to you -  Fungus found the actual terms of the seller which shows they are perfectly open to giving refunds for returned items.
Your opinion that the seller couldn't cancel shipping and was just trying to stick it to you is just one opinion of many possible interpretations. To go on the offensive because of it is churlish. Giving the seller 'overnight' before expecting a response is impatient and unreasonable. Forcing a chargeback in less than 12 hours after that is an unnecessary, impatient and overly aggressive move on your part. You obviously think your technique is the lowest stress route to getting what you want so enjoy the ride.

You can lead a horse to water and all that.

Except Mikey2016 would probably pick a fight with the horse as a strategy for making it drink.

Fraser is right, time bow out and go help those who appreciate it. On the positive side this thread has made me re-evaluate my understanding of international distance selling regs when buying through ebay.co.uk which are not as clear cut as I first thought.