Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest MacMuffin

Blocking of buyers

Recommended Posts

Not1CentMore

And then there is this...

 

 

When a Seller files a SNC, he / she must give a reason:

 

A. Buyer rejected product

B. Payment not received

C. Payment bounced or stopped

D. Terms not met

E. Buyer not contactable

F. Buyer and Seller agree not to proceed with sale

G. Seller has made a full refund to Buyer and Buyer has returned product

 

Buyer is notified that a SNC has been filed for 'such-and-such' reason and is given x-number of days to appeal, explaining their side and/or giving their reason for not completing the transaction.

 

If Buyer should elect not to respond to the SNC, then Seller prevails. IF Buyer responds, BoB reviews and makes a determination of 'fault' (Seller or Buyer) based on the information provided by both parties to the transaction. If either Buyer or Seller is dissatisfied with BoB's ruling, they do have an option to contact BoB for review.

 

Can not something similar be put in place when a Seller blocks a buyer?

 

Seller gives a 'reason' for the block from a 'drop down' list of 'approved' reasons, as determined by BoB Staff, and afforded a comment section, similar to SNC format, whereby Seller may explain his / her reason for blocking Buyer. (SNC complete for non-payment is, in my opinion, a 'no brainer' and block is justified, not for a certain period of time but 'until the cows come home'; indefinitely. As they say here, "good riddance to bad rubbish".).

 

Buyer would be notified that Seller has filed a 'block' and 'put Buyer on notice' as to the reason for the block; i.e.: Buyer has below 75% or Buyer 'threatening' / 'abusive' and what the block means for the Buyer (not able to bid on items offered by that particular Seller). Buyer would then be given perhaps 5-days to reply to the block motion giving their reason why he / she feel a block should not be put in place against them by that particular Seller.

 

BoB would then review, the same as when an appeal is made for a SNC, and determine whether or not the block will be allowed and both Seller and Buyer are notified of the decision.

 

This should eliminate 'frivolous' blocking of Buyers.

 

BoB may elect to review ALL blocks in place currently and determine which should remain (SNC complete non-payment / terms not met, for example) and which should go 'poof' OR BoB may elect to 'wipe the slate clean' (remove all blocks currently in place) and 'start from scratch'; not an ideal option for some of us who have dealt with a few 'crazies', but at least knowing that if the Buyer is blocked 'going forward', we won't have to put up with their 'stuff' again.

 

Just a thought....

 

Ruthie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lilythepink

I go with the argument that if a buyer is blocked for three months, that buyer will be unhappy anyway - so keeping the block would hardly appease the buyer.

 

But I fully support the contention that BoB monitor all blocks and those which are unreasonable should be deleted. Just my 2 cents worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Asha Craft

Am I the only one thinking: "Who cares?" I mean, if I block a buyer for a silly reason, then I only spite myself because they cannot buy from me again, meaning I don't get a "possible" successful sale through all the silliness. When I block a buyer, I am restricting them from buying FROM ME. Not from Bidorbuy. So what's the deal? What am I missing that is upsetting big bob so much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vinyl Lady Decals
And then there is this...

 

 

When a Seller files a SNC, he / she must give a reason:

 

A. Buyer rejected product

B. Payment not received

C. Payment bounced or stopped

D. Terms not met

E. Buyer not contactable

F. Buyer and Seller agree not to proceed with sale

G. Seller has made a full refund to Buyer and Buyer has returned product

 

Buyer is notified that a SNC has been filed for 'such-and-such' reason and is given x-number of days to appeal, explaining their side and/or giving their reason for not completing the transaction.

 

If Buyer should elect not to respond to the SNC, then Seller prevails. IF Buyer responds, BoB reviews and makes a determination of 'fault' (Seller or Buyer) based on the information provided by both parties to the transaction. If either Buyer or Seller is dissatisfied with BoB's ruling, they do have an option to contact BoB for review.

 

Can not something similar be put in place when a Seller blocks a buyer?

 

Seller gives a 'reason' for the block from a 'drop down' list of 'approved' reasons, as determined by BoB Staff, and afforded a comment section, similar to SNC format, whereby Seller may explain his / her reason for blocking Buyer. (SNC complete for non-payment is, in my opinion, a 'no brainer' and block is justified, not for a certain period of time but 'until the cows come home'; indefinitely. As they say here, "good riddance to bad rubbish".).

 

Buyer would be notified that Seller has filed a 'block' and 'put Buyer on notice' as to the reason for the block; i.e.: Buyer has below 75% or Buyer 'threatening' / 'abusive' and what the block means for the Buyer (not able to bid on items offered by that particular Seller). Buyer would then be given perhaps 5-days to reply to the block motion giving their reason why he / she feel a block should not be put in place against them by that particular Seller.

 

BoB would then review, the same as when an appeal is made for a SNC, and determine whether or not the block will be allowed and both Seller and Buyer are notified of the decision.

 

This should eliminate 'frivolous' blocking of Buyers.

 

BoB may elect to review ALL blocks in place currently and determine which should remain (SNC complete non-payment / terms not met, for example) and which should go 'poof' OR BoB may elect to 'wipe the slate clean' (remove all blocks currently in place) and 'start from scratch'; not an ideal option for some of us who have dealt with a few 'crazies', but at least knowing that if the Buyer is blocked 'going forward', we won't have to put up with their 'stuff' again.

 

Just a thought....

 

Ruthie

 

Excellently put, Ruthie. this is exactly the sort of idea I had, but you stated it soooo much better. :bigsmile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
qball
Am I the only one thinking: "Who cares?" I mean, if I block a buyer for a silly reason, then I only spite myself because they cannot buy from me again, meaning I don't get a "possible" successful sale through all the silliness. When I block a buyer, I am restricting them from buying FROM ME. Not from Bidorbuy. So what's the deal? What am I missing that is upsetting big bob so much?

 

Unfortunately, this "silliness" starts to drive legitimate buyers away from the site, affecting all sellers. It's this silliness that causes legitimate buyers to send complaints to us. So these actions affect all sellers on the site, not just the seller concerned, as they lose out on potential sales. As a result we lose many legitimate buyers from the site because of this "silliness".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
qball

Unfortunately we won't be monitoring or checking blocked bidder activity unless a complaint is received.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Asha Craft
Unfortunately, this "silliness" starts to drive legitimate buyers away from the site, affecting all sellers. It's this silliness that causes legitimate buyers to send complaints to us. So these actions affect all sellers on the site, not just the seller concerned, as they lose out on potential sales. As a result we lose many legitimate buyers from the site because of this "silliness".

 

Got it, I was looking at it from a seller's POV. I have never been blocked as a buyer so I would not know how it feels. If I think about it from a buyer's POV I would not want to deal with a seller that blocked me for silliness anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not1CentMore
Excellently put, Ruthie. this is exactly the sort of idea I had, but you stated it soooo much better. :bigsmile:

 

Thank-you Tananka. It, as they say here, "ain't perfect"; may need 'tweeking' on BoB's part to meet their criteria, but perhaps it is a 'start'; something to build on. Or, not. BoB may not 'take a shine' to the idea at all.

 

Short of that and the block expiration policy goes into affect, unless I will be violating one of BoB's policies (which I would never think to do intentionally), I will be playing 'Santa' on the last day of each month. My 'naughty' list will be updated monthly and should a block 'expire' on those Buyers who have bid/won/baled (SNC filed non-payment / SNC complete with Buyer at fault), I will be monitoring bids and should that Buyer bid again, bid will be deleted for 'legitimate' reason: "Seller has dealt with Buyer before and buyer did not complete transaction". Perhaps a few 'deleted bids' and the 'deadbeat' Bidder will get 'an understanding' that they are wasting their time bidding on my items. More work, granted, but less gray hair...or no hair at all.

 

Ruthie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kebs

So as I thought, the first problems of the not-being-able-to-block rule.. Some-one bids & wins a week ago. No payment, no reply to emails, nothing at all. SNC filed.. Under the old way, I could have blocked this person once it became clear I wouldn't be getting a cent from them.. Now I have to wait until the SNC is concluded.. So she bids & wins again this week?! :evil: So now I have to wait a week to file another SNC - more work for BOB as well, & in the meantime try to remember the names of the dead losses who don't pay so that I can watch my auctions like a hawk & delete ASAP! Have also had the same thing happen with buy-it-nows - guy buys 2 items, no payment etc.. SNC filed, & 4 days later (still not a word from him), he buys something else?! Come on BOB, can't we at least block if an SNC is filed? It can always be appealed or changed later.. This is just within the last 2 days by the way..

P.S. The first buyer has 59.57% positive feedback & already 19 negatives.. Why is she still allowed on BOB anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wayjen

But you still can block people now can't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seeds for Africa

Bob Management

I understand the action you have taken with the new blockling limitations (I dont however agree with it), however can you not please do one thing. Put an automatic block on a buyer from making a purchase from a seller who has a pending snc filed against that buyer? As per kebs post above......... it just makes no sense at all that a buyer who cant pay for purchase a will now pay for purchase b.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kebs
But you still can block people now can't you?

You can, but only once an SNC is completed as far as I know.. I don't have any of those little "block buyer" icons available under orders..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TGSA

BOB's new rule about 90 days blocking buyers does not make sense!

 

Like I said before, why would a seller block buyers unreasonably? Blocking a buyer might mean less sales but quite frankly, I am no longer accepting bids from buyers with negative feedback, I cannot be bothered. But this is my list of buyers I have blocked (I have reduced the names that identification is not possible:

 

[TABLE=class: display]

[TR=class: odd]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left sorting_1]sxxxxxxxx (6)

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left]Jxxxxxxx

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center]08 Dec 11

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center]

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: even]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left sorting_1]oxxxxxx (1)

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left]Exxxxxxx

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center]19 Oct 11

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center][/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: odd]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left sorting_1]Nxxxxxx (-2)

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left]Exxxxxx

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center]04 Dec 11

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center]

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: even]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left sorting_1]lsxxxxxxx (-1)

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left]Bxxxxxxx

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center]27 Nov 11

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center]

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: odd]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left sorting_1]Kxxxxx (-3)

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left]Nxxxxxx

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center]06 Dec 11

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center]

 

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: even]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left sorting_1]Dxxxxx (-1)

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_left]Bxxxxxxxxxxxx

[/TD]

[TD=class: watchlist_align_center]08 Dec 11

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

As everyone can see, the majority have negative feedback (not just because of me!), why should these 'buyers' (and I am kind here...) be allowed to waste one's time? I do prefer to deal with buyers who are willing to pay (within three days) and don't waste my time. Does not everyone feel the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just Beachin
Well, I can't agree that it's an identical principle - imagine us not seeing negatives against buyers who are atrocious at meeting their obligations? And removing their negative ratings would mean their ratings would be more positive?! :worried:

 

On rethinking your suggestion, Cali, I would opt for negatives to stay put for buyers and, that considered, it would hardly be fair to remove negatives only from sellers. Any more opinions ...?

 

The thing is, we cannot take this relationship between buyer and seller too personal. Some buyers are very confused when they first start on the site, perhaps they think it's like a store where they can put it back on the shelf before they pay?

 

There are other abusive buyers out there who blatantly ignore the rules, have hundreds of purchases and 20% neg's and neutrals due to SNC's. These are the buyers I do not wish to do business with.

 

I have limited stock, and I do not wish to wait 21 days to re-list, if some buyer has not read or is not following the rules. With this new decision about blocking being good for the site, I just don't get. If a buyer is blocked by me, and really want something, will go to another seller where they are welcome. bidorbuy will get there money from one seller or another, if that person really intends on paying.

 

This kind of decision is bad for the moral of the Sellers, and could in fact promote a type of anarchy with deleting bids.

The money may come from the buyers but it is paid by the sellers, However, we are not the bob darlings?

 

No offence intended to bidorbuy, I just disagree with the "no blocking" decision because it does not give me freedom of choice, I do not see how it could possibly be abused and once again does not make sense for anything other than the bottom line.

 

Regards,

Jenni

Just Beachin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just Beachin
You lose money with every SNC you file. 14 days of lost money to be exact.

 

Actually, 21 days if you take in the first 7 days before you can file the SNC (Hiya wayjen! )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lilythepink

Welcome to the "club", Jenni! I believe that each seller has the right to sell to whomsoever he/she pleases and no seller wants to deal with obstructive or difficult buyers who are well already in the system. However, there cannot be many sellers who won't go the extra mile (should I say miles) to assist a relatively new buyer on Bob?

 

I still stand by my conviction that a blocking system which is only active for 3 months is tantamount to useless!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just Beachin

Actually, this decision really irks me, one more list I have to make and consult! Could management at least give us a beacon of "warning" or better yet "request" when somebody attempt's, that we have previously filed a snc against, tries to bid or purchase a item. Come on Admin "Throw us a bone!", it would behoove the Management to allow our product to be out there for serious buyers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lilythepink

You know the old saying, Just Beaching: "If wishes were horses, beggars would ride!" lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kebs

I still say that if the SNC was completed for non-payment, there should be no time limit on the buyer block for that particular buyer. I personally send 2 emails before I file an SNC, so there is no excuse for not paying or not knowing the SNC was coming.. I really don't want to deal with non-payers over & over again...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Little Miss Muffet

:awesome:I have an unblocked buyer waiting to be sent back to the slammer.:sneaky:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lilythepink
:awesome:I have an unblocked buyer waiting to be sent back to the slammer.:sneaky:

 

And in three months' time that buyer will be released from the slammer and be giving you grief again?!! Not fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bargain Coins

After reading all above i cannot but disagree with BOB. Both the seller and the buyer Must have equal rights and here the buyer trumps the seller. Why? My conclusion is that BOB benefits by this money wise.

the seller must list items, sometimes pay to list. Then await a buyer, do the deal end of story.

the buyer, look, decide by which seller to bid/buy, buy/win, pay ending the story. Wonderful all is happy even BOB getting listing fee and success fee.

 

What happens if you cannot block those skeezy buyers, Remember you cannot block any buyer as the buyer must do a transaction with you first then only on the order that block option was given. So the seller dealt with the buyer and decided to block the buyer, same as "admission reserved""toegang voorbehou" by shops etc. the seller now has his own list of skeezy buyers, don't have to sit 24hrs and checking every bid made on his lots, deleting those bids, wasting time to argue why bid was deleted etc etc.

 

to allow these skeezy buyer it cost the seller, to list, pay for listing, paying the success fees, packing the items for shipping, emailing/phone/sms the buyer couple times to pay. 7 days later file snc. wait another 7days to know what the buyer decided. (all this time the item could have been sold to another buyer) ok the skeezy buyer told BOB they going to pay (but do not) or don't even bother to reply. even if they pay, you as seller lost out, that money could been traded with. Ok they do not pay, so BOB gives you your success fee back, thanks. What about my time wasted, listing fees paid and even the other buyer who could have paid as per auction statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lilythepink

You are so right, Brandon, but until BoB try to understand the sellers' points of view there is a stalemate! :twisted:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
qball
After reading all above i cannot but disagree with BOB. Both the seller and the buyer Must have equal rights and here the buyer trumps the seller. Why? My conclusion is that BOB benefits by this money wise.

the seller must list items, sometimes pay to list. Then await a buyer, do the deal end of story.

the buyer, look, decide by which seller to bid/buy, buy/win, pay ending the story. Wonderful all is happy even BOB getting listing fee and success fee.

 

What happens if you cannot block those skeezy buyers, Remember you cannot block any buyer as the buyer must do a transaction with you first then only on the order that block option was given. So the seller dealt with the buyer and decided to block the buyer, same as "admission reserved""toegang voorbehou" by shops etc. the seller now has his own list of skeezy buyers, don't have to sit 24hrs and checking every bid made on his lots, deleting those bids, wasting time to argue why bid was deleted etc etc.

 

to allow these skeezy buyer it cost the seller, to list, pay for listing, paying the success fees, packing the items for shipping, emailing/phone/sms the buyer couple times to pay. 7 days later file snc. wait another 7days to know what the buyer decided. (all this time the item could have been sold to another buyer) ok the skeezy buyer told BOB they going to pay (but do not) or don't even bother to reply. even if they pay, you as seller lost out, that money could been traded with. Ok they do not pay, so BOB gives you your success fee back, thanks. What about my time wasted, listing fees paid and even the other buyer who could have paid as per auction statements.

 

Brandon, we have to disagree with you. We gain nothing out of this. SNC's can be high, costing us millions of Rands in lost revenue every month, sellers want to be equal, but when they abuse the blocking facility, which they did, all have to suffer for it. Sellers were blocking good buyers with lots of ratings and with very questionable reasons for doing so and now with the CPA in place, discrimination is not permitted, even discriminating against new buyers with no ratings who hadn't transacted yet.

 

You guys have been selling on the site for years, you know the rules when it comes to enhancements - you are paying for better exposure, better visibility, higher ranking etc., regardless of whether the item sells or not. You get the exposure on your products, so the enhancements did the job of getting buyers to your listings. Thereafter it's up to the buyer and seller to conclude the deal. Stipulate a reasonable time period for payment, if payment has not been made within that period, you can relist the item and then file the SNC on the previous listing.

 

This is a cost of doing business online. Just as we have to accept and process thousands of SNC's monthly to our detriment too, it is part and parcel of trading online, having said that, we do understand your concerns, but unfortunately many sellers simply took it upon themselves to abuse this facility to block to the detriment of many good sellers (and buyers).

 

We did see it from the sellers "perspective" and did introduce the blocking feature for sellers and they abused it, but we cannot allow that to continue. We lost thousands and thousands of potentially good buyers due to this, which results in potential lost revenue for sellers too, because many decided to block buyers for no valid reason, the number of successful and valid buyers far outweighs the number of buyers who don't complete the deals.

 

Sellers need to get this attitude of "buyers are the enemy" out of their heads. Any potential buyer should be treated just as that, a potential buyer - or better yet - YOUR customers.

 

Yes, it is frustrating to get a sale and the buyer does not conclude it, just as it is for us to go through thousands of SNC's, disputes, complaints, queries, many from legitimate buyers when the sellers treat them like dirt.

 

Service is a mind set, one which many sellers fail to offer or understand. Rather put yourself in the new buyers shoes, they are new, it is a nerve racking experience to buy online for the first time (safety and security, payments, delivery issues etc.), all factors that affect new comers to the site. So instead of being hostile to new comers, embrace them, help them, guide them.

 

There are never any guarantees when you pay for advertising, it is a cost of doing business, and you do reap the benefits of it, by way of page views, bids, potential buyers finding your listings, successful sales etc. But the actual sale is never guaranteed until the buyers pays.

 

Without sounding like a "stuck record"...

 

Say you had a store in a mall, you decided to spend money on advertising in the paper, a magazine and on TV. The ads flight for several weeks and you have spent thousands of Rands. You have many potential buyers walk into your store, browse, spend hours in your store, ask questions, take up your time, but eventually don't buy and walk out, you don't go back to the newspaper, magazine and TV company to ask for your money back. You got the exposure and that's what you paid for, without any guarantees being offered that you would have sales due to your advertising efforts. You can't begrudge us for charging enhanced listing fees for the advertising you opted for and you did get the exposure you paid for, regardless of sales taking place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brands online

Why not then just modify the "blocking buyers" facility to include a reason when blocking. Any buyer that feels the reason is not valid and they've been blocked unfairly can then appeal to BOB ( like SNC appeals) and the seller in question can then be "dealt" with by BOB. Why should all sellers suffer because of the abuse of some? Also, I still don't understand why the block needs to fall away after 3 months? Negative seller ratings never fall away? You reap what you sow...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...