False Negative 3: My Third Ebay Dispute

I'm begining to think I might be a bad Ebay seller, as I recently had my THIRD Ebay dispute. Read the case file, and I'll let you be the judge. I'll post the results next week.

BACKGROUND

Item: Beatles '65 LP, mono, still in shrink.

Item description: Vinyl - NM Beautiful lp!!

NOTE: VINYL IS NOT PLAY TESTED! If you would like for me test an lp, just let me know!

(Please ask any and all questions BEFORE the auction ends. I will answer any questions you might have on condition, playability, shipping etc...Please don't hesitate to ask!!)

Buyer purchased this and one other lp from me.


EMAIL FROM BUYER TO ME:

Hello...

I received the albums today, thank you. The Beatles 65' plays with static background noise more on side 2 than 1, the other album plays and sounds great and I am very happy with that one.

Thanks

MY RESPONSE:

Hi...sorry about not getting back with you sooner...as stated in my description, I only grade the lp on sight, they are not play tested unless requested before the end of auction. sorry !!


BUYER RESPONSE:

why have a 7 day return policy? a NM vinyl should SOUND NM you can see the marks under bright it miss-graded the other album was dead on. i'll take it up with paypal.

ADDITIONAL INFO...from the description of the item...

Return policy details: The buyer has 7 days to return the item (the buyer pays shipping fees). The item will be refunded.


MY RESPONSE:

With all due respect, I never advertised the lp as NM SOUNDING. I clearly stated that the vinyl was NOT PLAY TESTED (twice in fact...once I say it's not play tested and the second time I say please ask if you want the lp play tested). Please, in the future, read the full description before you bid. It saves troubles like this. I am an honest seller with an excellent feedback rating...I am not trying to cheat anyone...I simply do not have the time to listen to everything I sell, so that is why it is imperative that you ask questions before you bid.


BUYER RESPONSE:

I never said you were not honest or trying to cheat me its just my opinion the album was misgraded visually and i simply want to return it. Like I said the other album was dead on and i am very happy with it. No, you never said it sounded NM but it was graded NM and should be pleasant to listen to. i am not trying to give you a hard time or anything or even being nasty about it, i guess i don't understand why you have a 7 day return and won't honor it.


MY RESPONSE:

I'm sorry if I seem defensive, as that is truly not how I mean to sound. Sometimes email can make you "sound" one way, when in reality it's not what I am trying to portray. Sorry, again about that. It seems the issue here is one that is a hair splitting one. I believe the NM visual grade was accurate, as it was just that, a visual grade. That has zero to do with the sound. Therefore, I do not think the refund policy applies, as the description was accurate. I expressly added the play test rules for this very reason...so I would not have to argue about the record. I hope you understand my position...I wrote the play test info for a reason, so everyone would know the NM grade was a visual one, not a sound one...they are, in this instant, completely seperate things...if you said initially the visual grade was incorrect, that would be one thing, but you were disapointed in the SOUND, which I specifically wrote about in the description. On principle, I cannot honor the refund because the basis for your request does not fit Ebays refund policy. I am sorry about this and hope you understand my position.
-------------------

At this point, the buyer filed a dispute with Paypal claiming the item was significantly different than described. He went on to say people should grade records via the Goldmine standard (record grading/pricing guide).

I disputed the claim again, and actually agreed with the Goldmine claim...not because I grade by those standards, but because the Goldmine grading actually goes to my point.

BUYER RESPONDS:

how do my words agree with you? what are you reading? static noise is always due to some kind of marks on the vinyl . you grade vinyl under bright light dont you? again what is the 7 day return policy for i don't see any stipulations on the listing. can you tell me where it is ? if you grade NM then it should be near mint all the way.

MY RESPONSE:

Sir, the stipulation is I DO NOT PLAY TEST THE RECORDS, PLEASE EMAIL ME BEFORE THE END OF THE AUCTION IF YOU WANT ME TO LISTEN TO THE RECORD QUALITY. Goldmine clearly states a NM record: Virtually flawless records are not perfect. NOT PERFECT. A very minor scuff and very little else can appear on the vinyl. You said...under bright light you can see the marks on the vinyl. This makes the record not perfect, but still NM. Besides that, the sound is irrelivent to the grade because I said, SPECIFICALLY that I DID NOT grade based on sound. So, anything in your complaint about sound is not my responsibility as you did not inquire on it PRIOR to purchasing the record. That is YOUR fault, not mine. I've bought and sold thousands of records, and I know how to grade. I stand behind my grade, and disagree that the record is significantly not as described as your complaint claims. If you had a problem with the condition initially, we also wouldn't be here right now...but your first email was about SOUND, and you have changed that, I believe falsely, to a visual grading issue because you know the sound quality is a moot issue in this case. Let me say this again, the sound quality is not part of the grade because 3 times I stated it was not part of the grade...3 TIMES...you failed to inquire about me listening to the record, so that negates your claim and thus the refund policy.

BUYER RESPONSE:

you are very difficult too work with i have purchased records in the $$$$$ range with ease we can go back and forth on this for weeks i am trying to be very civil on this but clearly we are not going to come to civil conclusion .so lets have paypal decide and get it over with.
---------------

At this point, the buyer escalated the dispute to a claim.

I responded one last time, basically I pleaded with the Paypal people to not let the buyer win this case based on the bogus claim that the record was visually graded wrong. Remember, his first email said the SOUND was a little off, not the visual grade. I still stick by the grade of Near Mint, and contend the sound was never graded, and shouldn't be the basis for a refund, as he never requested that I listen to it.

Am I being difficult? Yes. But on principle I believe I did nothing wrong, and I refuse to give in to people who take shortcuts and want to be rewarded for it. The case went to mediation, and the verdict was returned...

What do you think? Should I have to refund the money? Or will the sale stand? Post your comment and I'll reveil the verdict soon!!