I have sold on eBay for years, both as a private seller and through business selling, but a recent experience has left me asking a serious question: is eBay’s returns system now encouraging buyers to misuse “item not as described” claims?
This particular sale was not from my business account. It was one of my own old dresses, sold privately. The listing was for a Boden navy blue and beige chevron stripe fit and flared knitted dress, UK size 12. The colours were clearly stated in the title and again in the description: navy blue and beige.
The photos also showed the dress clearly from several angles.
The item description specifically said:
“This Boden navy blue and beige chevron stripe fit and flared knitted dress…”
Yet the buyer opened an INAD, claiming the dress was “really beige” and that they had expected “a more lighter colour like the photo.” There had been no clarification sought from the buyer prior to purchase.
In other words, the reason given was about the colour, even though beige was clearly mentioned in the listing.
I replied to the buyer pointing out that the description did state the dress was blue and beige, and that the item matched the description and photographs.
I was confused as to why this was being treated as “not as described” when the colour they objected to was actually written in the listing. Absolutely no reply.
I contacted eBay, and to their credit, they agreed with me. They found in my favour and released my funds. That should have been the end of the matter.
But here is the sting in the tail – I then get this email
eBay also refunded the buyer and allowed them to keep the dress.
So what message does that send?
If a buyer can open a false “item not as described” case, lose the case, still receive a refund, and keep the item, how does that encourage honesty? Surely it does the opposite. It tells people that there may be a way to get around the system, keep the goods, and get their money back anyway.
This is especially frustrating for private sellers. This was not a business transaction from a shop with endless stock and profit margins. It was one of my own dresses from my personal wardrobe. I listed it accurately, photographed it properly, described the colours clearly, and still ended up watching the buyer be refunded and allowed to keep the item.
I understand that eBay wants to protect buyers. Nobody wants buyers to be stuck with genuinely misdescribed goods. But seller protection has to mean something too. If eBay agrees the seller did nothing wrong, then why reward the buyer with both a refund and the item?
This type of decision risks encouraging more false claims. It makes honest sellers feel vulnerable, and it makes dishonest buyers realise that using the “not as described” route can sometimes result in a free item. You can judge for yourself whether this was genuinely “not as described” or whether the system is being used in a way that disadvantages sellers.
eBay needs to look seriously at how these cases are handled. If sellers are doing everything correctly, accurate titles, honest descriptions, clear photographs, and prompt communication, they should not be left feeling that the platform is rewarding the very behaviour it claims to protect against.
Buyer protection matters. But so does seller protection. At the moment, cases like this make it feel as though honest sellers are being asked to pay the price for a system that scammers can too easily exploit. What are your thoughts ? Has this happened to you ? Let me know in the comments!
LCChaosandhome 