Ugh Accidentally bought a redeemed redemption card.

[VandyDan]

Regardless of who's right or wrong, you should be able to return it for a refund. If the seller won't agree, Paypal will support you even if it was well described. I normally would say you should do the right thing and pay for it but it seems like the seller was just trolling for someone that wasn't paying attention.

I agree with this.

Plus, if they are so collectible, he should have no trouble selling it a second time.

 

[goldenegg1]

It said redeemed in the title and description.
He made a mistake, suck it up and live and learn.
If I'm the seller I would fight any paypal claim in regards to this.

 

[cartersprings]

It said redeemed in the title and description.
He made a mistake, suck it up and live and learn.
If I'm the seller I would fight any paypal claim in regards to this.

It didn't mention anything about being redeemed in the description.

This Auction is for the card shown Rare card one every 2400 packs.. fair Buy it now price

This sucks. I'd try to get the seller to issue to refund. There is no doubt what he was fishing for.

 

[All The Hype]

I'd file a claim to get your money back.

Suck it up? Are you guys kidding? The description is not clear, the picture does not show the scratched code, and the whole auction is a complete fishing trip.

Why let the seller get away with this? No one would buy a used redemption card for $50, and everyone knows it including the seller. The only way that would get hit is if someone misread or misunderstood the auction. Why would you even list this card, and why would you list it for $50 when it's worth maybe a few pennies unless you were trying to rip someone off?


I'd ask for a refund and then file a paypal claim if he doesn't return your money.

 

[danimal]

Anyone who thinks the buyer should return it for a refund can never bitch about a buyer returning a card due to suspected buyer's remorse. The title clearly said REDEEMED, you bought it and immediately had buyer's remorse. You fracked up and thought you were getting a "steal", had this been an unredeemed card we'd be reading a thread about a "SICK STEAL". Well it goes both ways, if you don't send a stupid seller some extra cash why should it be ok for a stupid buyer to get a refund? If the bidder didn't want to pay he should have just taken the non-paying bidder strike, one strike isn't going to hurt your account. But sending the money and then demanding a refund = ****.

 

[MartinFFcollector]

Anyone who thinks the buyer should return it for a refund can never bitch about a buyer returning a card due to suspected buyer's remorse. The title clearly said REDEEMED, you bought it and immediately had buyer's remorse. You fracked up and thought you were getting a "steal", had this been an unredeemed card we'd be reading a thread about a "SICK STEAL". Well it goes both ways, if you don't send a stupid seller some extra cash why should it be ok for a stupid buyer to get a refund? If the bidder didn't want to pay for he should have just taken the non-paying bidder strike, one strike isn't going to hurt your account. But sending the money and then demanding a refund = ****.

I had bought 15+ of these Blue auto redemptions. 2 were for a few bucks under/over $50. Yes, I thought I got lucky or maybe it was the new price. Since after release many of these Blues are selling for about $10.

As for the sending $, I never noticed the "redeemed" until after I opened the envelope.

I never complain about refunding buyers. Heck, right now I'm refunding a Gold Ref auto. I never saw a ding. No ding in the scan. His has a ding. Refund coming. Sodl some Topps USA sets. Buyer said 9 players were missing. Can I prove they weren't? Nope. Refund coming. It happens. I can buy anything anywhere and get a refund. Few exceptions like services, or you get a check from the company headquarters or pay a restocking fee etc. ebay should be no different.

I filed a claim.

If I thought he was on the up and up I would have let it go. Based on our conversations, this was intentional and he was fishing for a fool and caught one. I'll fight it out of principle and to help deter him from doing it again to others with his alt acct.

 

[danimal]

What is the basis of your claim? You got exactly what the auction stated.

 

[Musial Collector]

What is the basis of your claim? You got exactly what the auction stated.

Depends how technical u want to get
The title may say redeemed but the description does not mention it at all, the picture shown is the front, doesnt show the side with the code showing its been scratched. Seller was clearly trying to deceive.

 

[MartinFFcollector]

What is the basis of your claim? You got exactly what the auction stated.

I'll try whatever I can.

Yes I got what was stated. Am I entitled to fight it? Worth a try. If he truly believes it's worth $50, he can sell it again. That's why I issue refunds all the time. 1. Basically I have to 2. I stand behind what I'm selling as sellable and will just try again.

 

[danimal]

I still don't see how there was any deception. The scan showed the entire front, which is all 99% of all auctions show just the front. The auction VERY clearly stated Redeemed, it was the 4th word in the title! Before you read Blue or anything else is the word redeemed.

I am always on the side of folks who get ripped off, but no one got ripped off here. This is a very clear cut case of the buyer getting exactly what the seller said he was selling. It's not the sellers fault someone sent him $49 for a redeemed redemption card! I think in this case you all like and are friends with the OP and are on his side for that reason only. There is nothing deceptive about that auction. If you are "tricked" by that auction you are basically admitting you lack basic reading comprehension skills.

Plus his auction says "No returns". I am truly not trying to be an ass, even though I know I may sound like one, but this is 100% a case of the OP having buyer's remorse. Classic case of not taking responsibility for one's own actions.

 

[All The Hype]

I still don't see how there was any deception. The scan showed the entire front, which is all 99% of all auctions show just the front. The auction VERY clearly stated Redeemed, it was the 4th word in the title! Before you read Blue or anything else is the word redeemed.

I am always on the side of folks who get ripped off, but no one got ripped off here. This is a very clear cut case of the buyer getting exactly what the seller said he was selling. It's not the sellers fault someone sent him $49 for a redeemed redemption card! I think in this case you all like and are friends with the OP and are on his side for that reason only. There is nothing deceptive about that auction. If you are "tricked" by that auction you are basically admitting you lack basic reading comprehension skills.

Plus his auction says "No returns". I am truly not trying to be an ass, even though I know I may sound like one, but this is 100% a case of the OP having buyer's remorse. Classic case of not taking responsibility for one's own actions.

It's buyer's remorse because he thought he was getting something different. That's completely different than buyer's remorse when you knew exactly what the item was but simply feel that you paid too much. Big difference.

Who lists a redeemed redemption card for $50? Everyone knows that's not worth anywhere near that amount, which basically means one thing - that the seller was trying to deceive. Why didn't he scan the back of the card? Why didn't he provide a more accurate description in the listing description? The lack of information makes it clear that this was an attempt to hope to deceive someone.

I agree with you in principle that a buyer should be accountable for reading the full auction, but by saying he's stuck with a ******** item where the seller intentionally set a trap, you're basically saying you think this is ok for people to set booby traps and land mines all over eBay and that buyers should have to deal with that crap on a regular basis. I disagree with that completely.

I think auctions should be clearly laid out with a picture of the exact item, which shows all important imperfections so there is no doubt in the buyer's mind. Had this seller done so and the buyer still hit the BIN, then yes, it'd be his fault. But since the item was not clearly defined, it's the seller's fault for not properly describing the item to make it clear for potential buyers.

 

[mancini79]

Don't see how the seller deceived the product. It was stated clearly in the title regardless of the asking price. If I were the seller, no way would I accept a full refund but would consider a partial refund for HIS misunderstanding. Seller shouldn't have to take 100% responsibility here.

 

[MartinFFcollector]

I still don't see how there was any deception. The scan showed the entire front, which is all 99% of all auctions show just the front. The auction VERY clearly stated Redeemed, it was the 4th word in the title! Before you read Blue or anything else is the word redeemed.

I am always on the side of folks who get ripped off, but no one got ripped off here. This is a very clear cut case of the buyer getting exactly what the seller said he was selling. It's not the sellers fault someone sent him $49 for a redeemed redemption card! I think in this case you all like and are friends with the OP and are on his side for that reason only. There is nothing deceptive about that auction. If you are "tricked" by that auction you are basically admitting you lack basic reading comprehension skills.

Plus his auction says "No returns". I am truly not trying to be an ass, even though I know I may sound like one, but this is 100% a case of the OP having buyer's remorse. Classic case of not taking responsibility for one's own actions.

I get what your saying. I screwed up. I admit that. That "No returns" thing is BS and if you buy/sell on ebay you know that. I've had quite a few. Paypal will override the ebay "No returns" depending on the situation.

He bought the redemption for $100 on Christmas and thinks $50 is a fair price for his used redemption. Claims he collects them. He acts interested in my other used redemptions. I call BS but I offered him my used ones in exchange for a refund. Since he says they are so valuable. He doesn't really think that though for this redemption. Buying time until Paypal rules in his favor. Then it's over. Not going to mess with his auctions or hack his PC or anything. Just trying to get my $ back. If not, life goes on. No biggie.

Just trying to get my $ back because I feel he might be trying to deceive. Half price redemption BIN. You know buyers jump quick for that. Only mentioned redeemed 1x. Had it been mentioned redeemed more than 1x, I would feel he's on the up and up. But I dont. Based on our emails. So out of principle, I'm having buyers remorse. Yeah, I'm the one to ultimately blame here. But I "give away" so much money due to "item not received" or other reasons, I couldn't care less. These "clear cut" rules on ebay are bent all the time and I think it's time I stop bending over and start doing the bending.

 

[danimal]

So what was the basis of your claim? Did you lie to paypal and file and item not as described? Or did you truthfully state I bought something, feel bad about and now want my money back?

I still can't wrap my mind around how you think you are owed anything here. The seller did nothing wrong.

His auction is similar to most card auctions listed this these days. It is not uncommon at all to see an auction where the entire description is "You are bidding on the card listed in the title."

90% of all card auctions only scan the front and if the title of the auction has the word "redeemed" then isn't 100% assumed the code on the back is going to be scratched? So why would there be a need for a back scan? What further description is needed other than "redeemed" as soon as you get to that word, if you can comprehend simple English and have a basic understanding of modern baseball cards you have to know you are buying a card that cannot be redeemed.

This situation reminds me of the "occupy movement" where the 99% blame others for their shortcomings and want a free handout. I just cannot see how you can honestly think you are owed anything but the card you bought in this situation.

 

[All The Hype]

So what was the basis of your claim? Did you lie to paypal and file and item not as described? Or did you truthfully state I bought something, feel bad about and now want my money back?

I still can't wrap my mind around how you think you are owed anything here. The seller did nothing wrong.

His auction is similar to most card auctions listed this these days. It is not uncommon at all to see an auction where the entire description is "You are bidding on the card listed in the title."

90% of all card auctions only scan the front and if the title of the auction has the word "redeemed" then isn't 100% assumed the code on the back is going to be scratched? So why would there be a need for a back scan? What further description is needed other than "redeemed" as soon as you get to that word, if you can comprehend simple English and have a basic understanding of modern baseball cards you have to know you are buying a card that cannot be redeemed.

This situation reminds me of the "occupy movement" where the 99% blame others for their shortcomings and want a free handout. I just cannot see how you can honestly think you are owed anything but the card you bought in this situation.

Whether or not the OP is right or wrong, do you personally think the seller of this listing was listing the card because he truthfully bought a buyer would hit the BIN and be happy with their purchase?

 

[danimal]

Whether or not the OP is right or wrong, do you personally think the seller of this listing was listing the card because he truthfully bought a buyer would hit the BIN and be happy with their purchase?

That has nothing to do with this. But I don't see why the seller would think the buyer wouldn't be happy. He had a good and he put it up for $50 and someone bought it, so it is reasonable to assume the buyer thought it was worth $50. The seller spelled out exactly what was for sale, so following that logic one would have to assume the the seller would think the buyer is happy since the buyer got exactly what was in the auction.

I'd just like to know what type of claim the OP filed because I don't know how he could expect to win filing a dispute that says I bought something and now I don't want it, last time I checked that wasn't an option.

 

[fengzhang]

This is ridiculous. The buyer thought he could take advantage of the seller and instead it bit him in the ass. Pay up. We see tons of posts on here from a seller's perspective when the buyer fails to read the auction fully. This is no different. Neither the buyer nor the seller had good intentions in this situation. They both wanted an item at a price far from its actual value. The seller won in this case. PAY UP.

 

[fengzhang]

So what was the basis of your claim? Did you lie to paypal and file and item not as described? Or did you truthfully state I bought something, feel bad about and now want my money back?

I still can't wrap my mind around how you think you are owed anything here. The seller did nothing wrong.

His auction is similar to most card auctions listed this these days. It is not uncommon at all to see an auction where the entire description is "You are bidding on the card listed in the title."

90% of all card auctions only scan the front and if the title of the auction has the word "redeemed" then isn't 100% assumed the code on the back is going to be scratched? So why would there be a need for a back scan? What further description is needed other than "redeemed" as soon as you get to that word, if you can comprehend simple English and have a basic understanding of modern baseball cards you have to know you are buying a card that cannot be redeemed.

This situation reminds me of the "occupy movement" where the 99% blame others for their shortcomings and want a free handout. I just cannot see how you can honestly think you are owed anything but the card you bought in this situation.

Whether or not the OP is right or wrong, do you personally think the seller of this listing was listing the card because he truthfully bought a buyer would hit the BIN and be happy with their purchase?

And did the buyer hit the BIN thinking that the seller was going to be happy with the price (the set normally sells for $100)? Each party was trying to get a steal. $50 is a ludicrous price for the redeemed redemption card or for the actual set. No one had any intentions of getting a fair price. The seller won in this case.

 

[cartersprings]

Whether or not the OP is right or wrong, do you personally think the seller of this listing was listing the card because he truthfully bought a buyer would hit the BIN and be happy with their purchase?

That has nothing to do with this. But I don't see why the seller would think the buyer wouldn't be happy. He had a good and he put it up for $50 and someone bought it, so it is reasonable to assume the buyer thought it was worth $50. The seller spelled out exactly what was for sale, so following that logic one would have to assume the the seller would think the buyer is happy since the buyer got exactly what was in the auction.

I'd just like to know what type of claim the OP filed because I don't know how he could expect to win filing a dispute that says I bought something and now I don't want it, last time I checked that wasn't an option.

This Auction is for the card shown Rare card one every 2400 packs.. fair Buy it now price

I don't feel the seller clearly spelled out exactly what was for sale. His description was lacking severely and made no mention of it being scratched/used. It's pretty obvious what he was fishing for. I view the title as something used to generate search results and the description telling what is being sold. With all the rampant keyword spamming in titles (in general), it's easy to miss words.

In this case, the OP could file a claim for not as described, since it mentions nothing in the description about being redeemed.

 

[danimal]

I don't feel the seller clearly spelled out exactly what was for sale. His description was lacking severely and made no mention of it being scratched/used. It's pretty obvious what he was fishing for. I view the title as something used to generate search results and the description telling what is being sold. With all the rampant keyword spamming in titles (in general), it's easy to miss words.

In this case, the OP could file a claim for not as described, since it mentions nothing in the description about being redeemed.

Are you serious? Can you read? Do you understand English? This is the exact title "2011 Topps Chrome Redeemed Blue Refractor Auto USA Team autographed set card" how did the seller not spell out exactly what was for sell? He even spelled it correctly! He spelled out what was being sold 100% correct. I cannot see how you people think the OP is in the right here. He bought a redeemed redemption and that is what he got. How is that not as described.

If we put this in math formula form:

ITEM NOT AS DESCRIBED --> A=B (this would be a legit item not as described) but in this case A=A, so how is the item not as described? What logic are you people using?

The OP obviously didn't take time to read what was being sold, so even if the seller put in big bold letters in the description who is to say the buyer would have took the time to read it. The OP was looking for what he thought was a "steal" and from the looks of things, hit the BIN and paid rather quickly.