Legal Threat Over eBay Feedback
An eBay buyer is facing legal action after leaving negative feedback for the seller in one of his transactions.
Chris Read purchased a mobile phone using the popular online auction site. According to Mr Read the phone arrived damaged and was a different model to that advertised. Mr Read returned the phone to seller Joel Jones and received a complete refund.
That should have been an end to the matter, but things took a turn for the worse when Mr Read left negative feedback for the transaction. His comment read: "Item was scratched, chipped and not the model advertised."
Mr Jones, who trades as Onsalexuk on eBay, was obviously upset by the public criticism and threatened Mr Read with legal action unless he retracted the comment. Understandably Mr Read refused to budge, stating that his comment was an honest appraisal of the transaction.
A few days later Mr Read received a letter from legal harlots acting on behalf of Mr Jones. It read: "The negative feedback you left on October 3 regarding Samsung F700 was unfair and is damaging to my business's reputation and ability to trade.
"We require a signed statement accepting that the feedback is unfair."
Mr Read is adamant he's not retracting his comment and Mr Jones is equally adamant that he'll follow it through to court if need be.
My opinion: If Mr Read did receive the wrong phone then he's definitely entitled to a refund, which I'm pleased to see Mr Jones honoured. Gentlemanly conduct would have ended the matter there without the need to resort to negative feedback. However, despite me disagreeing with his decision, Mr Read was entitled to express his opinion via the feedback system. In offering a refund Mr Jones obviously acknowledged that Mr Read had a genuine reason for dissatisfaction. That being the case it's difficult to see why he (Mr Jones) is so cheesed off at the feedback left.
So, in short, they're both in the wrong: Read for squealing after being refunded and Jones for limping off to the lawyers at the first whiff of criticism.
So what do you think?
Chris Read purchased a mobile phone using the popular online auction site. According to Mr Read the phone arrived damaged and was a different model to that advertised. Mr Read returned the phone to seller Joel Jones and received a complete refund.
That should have been an end to the matter, but things took a turn for the worse when Mr Read left negative feedback for the transaction. His comment read: "Item was scratched, chipped and not the model advertised."
Mr Jones, who trades as Onsalexuk on eBay, was obviously upset by the public criticism and threatened Mr Read with legal action unless he retracted the comment. Understandably Mr Read refused to budge, stating that his comment was an honest appraisal of the transaction.
A few days later Mr Read received a letter from legal harlots acting on behalf of Mr Jones. It read: "The negative feedback you left on October 3 regarding Samsung F700 was unfair and is damaging to my business's reputation and ability to trade.
"We require a signed statement accepting that the feedback is unfair."
Mr Read is adamant he's not retracting his comment and Mr Jones is equally adamant that he'll follow it through to court if need be.
My opinion: If Mr Read did receive the wrong phone then he's definitely entitled to a refund, which I'm pleased to see Mr Jones honoured. Gentlemanly conduct would have ended the matter there without the need to resort to negative feedback. However, despite me disagreeing with his decision, Mr Read was entitled to express his opinion via the feedback system. In offering a refund Mr Jones obviously acknowledged that Mr Read had a genuine reason for dissatisfaction. That being the case it's difficult to see why he (Mr Jones) is so cheesed off at the feedback left.
So, in short, they're both in the wrong: Read for squealing after being refunded and Jones for limping off to the lawyers at the first whiff of criticism.
So what do you think?
0 comments:
Post a Comment