OT: Ebay Removed My Derek Jeter 1997 Topps Auto Card

[Runscott]

Chris, I'm wondering - since this actually impacts your business, thus your livelihood, even if on a very minute scale - couldn't you take ebay to small claims court? At that point, they would kind of be forced to research the two incidents, would identify the employee who seems to have a personal vendetta against you, and he would probably be fired. Does that seem logical, or am I missing something?

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Chris, I'm wondering - since this actually impacts your business, thus your livelihood, even if on a very minute scale - couldn't you take ebay to small claims court? At that point, they would kind of be forced to research the two incidents, would identify the employee who seems to have a personal vendetta against you, and he would probably be fired. Does that seem logical, or am I missing something?

Scott, it's a hobby for me, not a business.

Definitely not a business.

It's not really a big deal that I can't list for seven days, but the fact that someone at Ebay is targeting those that expose the scammers simply isn't right.

Ebay has twice removed two autograph cards (Fleer-Issued & Topps-Issued) of mine. When I re-listed my Jeter Fleer-Issued autograph, it was not removed and eventually sold.

Then I listed my Topps-Issued Jeter autograph card, it was removed and I was banned from listing for seven days.

Now check out the below Mantle forgery. It was removed twice. Ebay seller SellingMyPast re-listed it a second time and nothing. Up to a year ago, if a seller tried to re-list an item twice after it was removed, they would have been suspended for 30 days.

Also, Ebay seller SellingMyPast is using an old Scoreboard COA in an attempt to sell his Mantle forgery.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mickey-Mantl...item19e47d4c3a



selling-1.jpg

[Big Dave]

But he has a story on why it was removed, and now everything is good.



Note: this ball was put up for auction on Ebay on 10/29 and was to end 11/3* but was removed 2 hours before auction was to end by ebay for* trademark violation. I*contacted ebay and after*a lengthy conversation with several folks*authenticity of ball*is no longer in question**and ball is being allowed to be relisted. I know several folks had placed a bid on ball and since I do not know who you are so I can let you know*removal of listing has been corrected*I can only hope you are still looking for a Mickey Mantle autographed baseball. I am sorry for any inconvenience this has caused you folks who had bid on ball.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Runscott

...even if on a very minute scale

Anyone else have thoughts on my question?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Anyone else have thoughts on my question?

It impacted his sale but the rules for ebay supercede anything else on ebay. And I am sure, they have as I do on this board, a catch 22 clause for the ones that could be tweeners. Most times, I would think that Taking ebay to court would require deep pockets to win. Not sure if that answered your question though.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Leon

It impacted his sale but the rules for ebay supercede anything else on ebay. And I am sure, they have as I do on this board, a catch 22 clause for the ones that could be tweeners. Most times, I would think that Taking ebay to court would require deep pockets to win. Not sure if that answered your question though.

Thanks Leon. I'm talking about situations where there is no ebay rule violation, but an employee with a personal vendetta has created a violation. It's basically improper use of company information by an employee and I would think that the higher-ups would frown on that. Winning the case is not the issue - it is making ebay go to the trouble of having to send someone to small claims court, thus having to go through the process of figuring out which employee caused them the grief. And firing that employee.

People tend to think of corporations as entities in themselves, which they are; however, they are also obviously composed of a lot of individual meat-based people who make stupid individual decisions, often illegal, that the other people in the company would not approve of. Basically, this wasn't ebay that did this to Chris - it was a person. Same in my situation - someone who likes to have fun at the expense of others, had fun at my expense. Nothing truly evil - just using company resources to make my life a little difficult for a few moments.

Turnabout (turned up) is fair play.

[Big Dave]

Any litigation involving eBay must be done California, per their user's agreement.

The expense would far outweigh any benefit.

[Runscott]

Thanks, Dave. So then it comes down to bringing the offending employee to your home state, if you have enough evidence. That, along with his association with ebay and having committed the crime while under their employment, should be enough for him to lose his job.

[Mr. Zipper]

As a publicly traded company, you'd think eBay would have some sort of Ombudsman or Compliance Officer to escalate alleged improper/unethical employee behavior. Perhaps with a little digging, the identity of that type of person could be uncovered. (The regular complaint process is not appropriate because the issue is with an employee -- not with a transaction.)

This page at eBay, Inc. details the Board of Directors and also features the eBay Employee Code of Conduct and Ethics: http://investor.ebayinc.com/governance.cfm

If it was me, I'd try to find an Ombudsman. If that did not work, then write to every member of the Board of Directors until I got a satisfactory response.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Chris, I'm wondering - since this actually impacts your business, thus your livelihood, even if on a very minute scale - couldn't you take ebay to small claims court? At that point, they would kind of be forced to research the two incidents, would identify the employee who seems to have a personal vendetta against you, and he would probably be fired. Does that seem logical, or am I missing something?

I am not a lawyer, and anyone can file suit for anything in this country, but nobody has the inherent right to use ebay. They are a company selling their service. It seems that ebay would simply say that a user was negatively affecting their business, and then it would be on the plaintiff to prove discrimination, no?

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

I am not a lawyer, and anyone can file suit for anything in this country, but nobody has the inherent right to use ebay. They are a company selling their service. It seems that ebay would simply say that a user was negatively affecting their business, and then it would be on the plaintiff to prove discrimination, no?

I don't think companies can enforce their own rules differently against different people. But what I've tried to emphasize is that this is about a single vindictive employee, not the entire company. I think that if the company knew what was going on, they would fire the employee. But maybe not - perhaps they have an entire department of vigilantes who go out and try to drive undesirable sellers batty through random rule enforcement.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by Runscott

But what I've tried to emphasize is that this is about a single vindictive employee, not the entire company. I think that if the company knew what was going on, they would fire the employee. But maybe not - perhaps they have an entire department of vigilantes who go out and try to drive undesirable sellers batty through random rule enforcement.

Speculation obviously, but I agree.

I don't think eBay is officially targeting anyone or has a policy to intimidate and harass critics.

But is it possible there are bad elements in the hobby that have their "man on the inside"? Could there be a rogue element within eBay in the pocket of certain sellers?

Over the past 6 months or so, based on the consistent pattern of a) mass-produced bad material no longer being regularly removed as it once was, and b) bad things suddenly happening to critics, it seems clear to me.

[drcy]

...

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

Speculation obviously, but I agree.

I don't think eBay is officially targeting anyone or has a policy to intimidate and harass critics.

But is it possible there are bad elements in the hobby that have their "man on the inside"? Could there be a rogue element within eBay in the pocket of certain sellers?

Over the past 6 months or so, based on the consistent pattern of a) mass-produced bad material no longer being regularly removed as it once was, and b) bad things suddenly happening to critics, it seems clear to me.

Your scenario makes sense - I hadn't thought of anything like that.