Or a rear view mirror for that matter. But why do some of these vans with a fully blacked out rear screen(s) and no internal mirror, still have a rear wiper fitted? Is it honestly cheaper than just putting a plug into the bodywork hole where the wiper should fit? Back on topic this issue of paying to return items to some e-bay sellers is not an uncommon problem, but to my understanding, not illegal or against any e-bay rules providing the sellers have it written with their general T&C's and product description info. I have also heard of issues where the buyer is still liable for the product whilst in transit until it is returned to the seller. So a buyer could purchase a defective product and if it goes missing on the return to the seller they have no grounds for any compensation! The old phrase ' buyer beware' comes to mind, always read the small print. It is some loophole in the Distance Selling laws to do with private individuals compared to commercial enterprises.Doc H.
I must have missed this post on my previous visits. I think the solid rear doors are simply added solid screens probably, and there is no point in removing the rear wipers. Why bother? Returning faulty goods to any seller ebay or otherways, is the buyer's responsibility unless the seller has sent out faulty of imperfect goods. I.e.the fault oe imperfection existed at the time of delivery. This represents IMHO a failure on behalf of the seller to execute their duty to take reasonable care to ensure they send out goods that will have to be returned. If they do they are delinquent in their responsibility and can be reckless in this regard because they expect the buyer to foot the bill. They cannot visit their recklessness on the buyer their terms and conditions aren't worth the paper they are written on even if you agreed to them.
I do not seek compensation of any kind, merely the return of my out-of-pocket expenses which I had no control over. It is reasonable that the buyer pay return fees if the goods arrive in good condition. This is because they knew what the T&C were and chose to trade remotely. their choice within their own control. BUt that doesn't mean the seller can act irresponsibly causing the buyer to suffer expense.
As for the buyer being responsible for goods whist in transit this is the LAW. The buyer returning goods for a refund or anything else has a duty to ensure the goods are preserved in transit i.e. to insure them to their full value. Tis money could be claimed back from the seller if the seller has been negligent.
Caveat Emptor buyer beware, is a prolific phrase. This is a reason I like dealing with known sellers. In most cases it is not the seller' fault when things go wrong, but the seller's attitude towards a solution is what will either satisfy me or fill me with revile for that trader.
I if am treated appallingly, I want nothing more to do with the trader, which is why I try to make a test purchase first from remote sellers.
In this instance I was lucky because I intended to buy a roof bars and ladder clamps, ladder slide and a conduit tube also. Now I can buy these elsewhere without feeling sick that I have to deal with this seller if anything else went wrong. There are lots of companies with a good attitude out there who deserve our business.
Thanks for your response it was quite unjudgmental and on topic. Some here can't manage not to wander off at a tangent
When it suits me, I am a private individual when it doesn't I'm not. NEVER buy from a seller that imposes a status on you before doing business with them, they have a motive for doing that and it's usually not in your favour.
