I have not been on the forums in a long time (nice to be back) but figured thosethat have been victims of crooked thieving sellers on Ebay such as FXTOYS! wouldenjoy this story and eventual outcome. Here is what happened. I like many others appeared to getshilled bid by seller FXTOYS! It was painfully clear what was happening if youexamined the bids, feedback, retractions and the relistings. Ebay could careless, they even removed mynegative feedback. Paypal could careless because the seller withhis 75,000+ transactions was bringing in good money for them so they turned ablind eye. In the end I bundled up all my screen shotsand data and sent it to my credit cart company with this letter below and aftera fight with the seller and paypal I got the refund I was looking for!!! I feelbad for the 100’s of other sellers he scammer a few for what appears over $1kand this loser is still allowed to sell on ebay. I hope one day ebay does a better job of policing their sellers, this sort of activty sets them up for a class action lawsuit. Ebay will fall one day id they do not and their users agreement they hide behind can't circumvent federal law. My advise is to not riskbuying from him, clearly others have had bad experiences.
Below was my complaint (sorry long read)
To whom it may concern:
I am disputing the below charges as the seller who has accepted your card as payment, has violated US Antitrust laws. I would expect Citigroup not to endorse, support or turn a blind eye to criminal activities especially such that violated federal law. I am not disputing the fact that item was received but rather the illegal deceptive method and practices used by vendor in selling the item. I seek a refund for the amount of damages caused buy this illegal practice.
Based on the facts below I would like arefund of $725.00 for damages because I have been a victim of bid rigging. Bid rigging and other price fixing schemes are a felony defined by the Sherman Actof 1890. Bid rigging is punishable by both fines and imprisonment in addition to civil damage sought. Because of the secretive nature of big rigging and the difficultly of detection, bid rigging can be established either by direct evidence or by circumstantial evidence such as suspicious bid patterns and behavior.
The following is my account of the activities that occurred between me (buyer) and the seller (FXtoys!) or as know on paypal as “EIGHTYSGIRL” to establish a habitual pattern of bid rigging involving the seller.
I recently purchased six items from the seller where there was an obvious case of shill bidding on five of the item salong with numerous other items between related parties. The items numbers #141011474889, #310701775217, #380673293796, #310701775306, #3800673293036 for the auctions I bid on that have financial damages due to bid rigging. If you look at the bidding history there is a bidder listed as **r(79) that bid on these items as well. That fact alone does not prove anything but when you take a closer look at bidder **r(79) and it is clear to see that there is a grievous issue that need to be addressed.
If you examine the detailed bid history of bidder **r(79) you will see that this bidder has 147 bids placed on 60 items with 97% of those items being the sale seller. All the activity of this bidder is focused around just this seller. The bidder is bidding on items that are also available for sale from other sellers, but yet has chosen only to bid oni tems from this seller. Why because bidder **r(79) is running up the price of some of the items this seller has listed.
The bidder has 8 retracted bids all with the same seller. These are items #380673293036, #380673294366, #141011473712,#310689412927, #140998212159, #310701773688, #310701773911, #380673291604. The bidder has no retracted bids with any other seller. After the retraction the bidder **r(79) still bids on the items but at a price below what another bidder was willing to pay. This happened to me with two items. With item # 380673293036. I was currently the high bid on July 10th I got an outbid notice and I looked at the item. **r(79) had made several bids in $50.00 increments slowing driving up the price. My max bid was just over $400.00 and I needed to make a bid of at least $412.00 if I wanted a chance to win. A few moments later bidder **r(79) retracted their bid of what appeared to be $450.00 and placed a new bid of $400.00 just below my max bid. Bidder **r(79) knew after theretraction what I was willing to spend, and rebid just below that amountforcing my bid to the limit I was willing to pay. This same scenario that occurred with item #380673294366. I was momentarily outbid only to have another bid placed just below my max bid! This activity raises 2 questions; why did the seller not blocking this bidder from messing with their auctions and why was the bidding and retracting and rebidding at a price that was not going to win even done in the first place? The answer is clear, the bidder and seller are related and shared in the outcome of a high sales price. The bidding pattern oni tem 380673293036 from bidder **r(79) doesn’t match his normal bids of slowly bumping up the price he already knew what I was willing to spend and bids just below.
There was one item #310689412886, the bidder # **r(79) won on June 22nd2013. This item was relisted as item #141009799610. It appears bidder **r(79) did not pay. Why would the seller allow him to bid again on future items? In fact there were several items that bidder**r(79) won my guess is because the bid retraction was within the last several hours of the auction and couldn’t happen. Does bidder **r(79) in fact pay for these items? The evidence suggest NO. Neither the seller nor the buyer has left any feedback on these items. I have read every feed back left for and by seller fxtoy! and there is none left for or by an item that bidder **r(79) won. The Seller, fxtoys!, appears to be very diligent about leaving feedback for items sold. Courteous and professional feedback is always quickly left. I was left feedback quickly without request. Why was bidder **r(79) who several items not left any feedback? The answer is the bidder and sellerknow each other and the transaction never occurred, both parties knew this wasnot a valid buyer. This is an example of bid rigging.
Other oddities about bidder **r(79) is that he bid on Star Wars action figures Star Wars play sets and puzzles , A Milton Bradley Big Trak and Six Million dollar man doll. These are all unrelated toys the only thing in common is the seller. Ifthe bidder has such a wide verity of interest and with the market place as enormous as eBay, why are there no bids with other sellers for similar items??The Answers should be clear; the bidder and the seller are related and tryingto artificially raise the price by deceptive and unscrupulous practice of bidrigging that eBay should not allow, enforce and punish.
It is clear that there is criminal activitygoing on here between seller and bidder **r(79).
I also expect a refund of approximately $725.00 for the items purchased that bidder **r(79) manipulated. $725.00 is the total difference between what I paid and what the last bidder who was not bidder **r(79) was willing to spend. An example would be item #14101147889. I won with a bid of $152.50 after bidder **r(79) drove up the price from $44.00 to $152.50, or the artificial inflation of $108.50.
I have also figure out from the feedback left who the purchasers for the other items are that bidder **r(79) and the seller fraudulent inflated the price on due to bid rigging. Also after examiningother high dollar items not related to my transaction other than a commonseller it is clean the seller has a habitual pattern and habits uncommon to other sellers. EBay needs to do a better job of policing and enforcing its rules and policies against shill bidding and bid retraction within its own organization. Ignoring them is suspicious and makes EBay a de facto participants of bid rigging. Ebays lack of interest perhaps due to profiting by allowing this activity to knowing continue is upsetting and this seller continues freely on Ebay to continue this blatantly obvious practice even after it has been brought totheir attention.
As a consumer, I have the right to expect the benefits of free and open competition and I would expect Citigroup not to endorse such behavior.