The information obtained so far from Stoll is that they do open the case back for most watches -- where possible and necessary, at least. Read back on the threads where people have spoken to Stoll. They don't need to open case backs for view back watches, for example.Originally Posted by Boss13
Hope they don’t open the back on a Sinn UX as it’s filled with oil!
We've had that discussion. :-)
Just FYI, they managed to scratch the crystal on a watch I sent back through their authentication process.
Long boring story, suffice to say I will try to avoid using them in future.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Eek! Gotta ask: Are they paying up to the vendor for the damage they caused? I realise you might not know.
I was the vendor, that is how I know they did it beyond a doubt.
And no. They are not.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Ah, sorry, when you wrote "on a watch I sent back through their authentication process" I thought you meant you were the buyer and were returning the watch to the vendor.
That's unforgivable.
I know this is (much) easier said than done, but the County Court is there for you if they won't make good their error and you have the before and after evidence.
Spotted this abomination this morning. Wonder if this would be “authenticated” as suggested: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/325443681...mis&media=COPY
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Dogs dinner indeed. What on earth is going on?
I've had a hankering for this model of Air King since it was released (appreciating that it is most definitely a Marmite).
What it looks like VS what it should look like.
Sent through the ether by diddling with radio waves
God only knows. It looks like a 60’s - 70’s manual wind Rolex movement in a random case with an Air King dial and a tiny hand set? Box looks hooky too. Currently at a mind boggling £1,800????
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
That's some serious cash. If you look at the seller's other watches, they are all similar in nature (re-cased, different hands, etc). And they all go for a decent amount.
Sent through the ether by diddling with radio waves
Best to assume it won’t be covered. Most couriers don’t cover watches or watches above a certain limit. You can try reading the fine print for DHL or UPS. I know one of them did used to offer cover up to 4k for additional fee but it may have since changed to 2k from memory.
To quote Secursus :
we only cover items sold and shipped directly to the buyer.
Question: Was that said in the specific context of buying/selling or did they really mean it in general (i.e. when sending for repair)?
You may be best to email them to clarify for your specific situation, rather than rely on my or anyone else's experience. At least you then have it in writing for your specific situation. They were very responsive on email when I contacted them.
But in my situation, they told me no, not covered shipping to a third party, although yes this was in the context of sending to eBay authenticity as a third party. As you suggest possibly different in your scenario.
Read recent trustpilot reviews, (I haven't left one by the way, before anyone thinks I am on a rampage vs. Secrusus, just that they have been recommended many times, but there are some misunderstandings, clearly).
One recent review worryingly says that items are not covered if 'sent by an individual'...WTAF!?
The comapny has responded to that review to say that:
our policy covers individuals but we need to approve them on a case-by-case basis. Unfortunately, we have received too many frauds from individuals and have decided to restrain coverage and are now approving individuals one at a time.
They also say they are updatin their T&Cs....
End result, I would be very careful using them if I ever do again.
^^^ Many thanks for the comprehensive reply.
Secursus certainly looks like it's getting too complicated. 'Brittle' is a term I'd apply to it; too easy to get on the wrong side of it.
I've been using Parcel Pro for many years, albeit that I was fortunate enough to be in a position to set the account up through my company. I seem to recall, though, that - at the time, at least - they would set up accounts for individuals too, it just required prior approval. They're certainly a good value option, with insurance rates of 0.25% of the declared value.
I must admit that the longer I use them the more I worry about how easy it would be to make a successful claim. Their packing requirements are very stringent, to the extent that I've latterly been making videos of the process which I've then kept until safe receipt of the item has been acknowledged.
Edit: I just checked the packing requirements again and found this buried in the Ts and Cs:
And then...Double Box: Unless otherwise authorized by Parcel Pro in writing, all packages must be double boxed in new boxes and packaging and must include the tracking number on the inner box. The inner box must not be a small jewelry box which could be easily identified and/or discarded. Envelopes and packs are not eligible for coverage.
I have to admit I didn't know that the tracking number needs to be on the inner box (in addition to the recipient address), so I guess that means taking tape with you to the PO and sealing the outer box there and then. I've also been re-using boxes, but see now that both the inner and outer boxes need to be new/unused.Maintain Packaging: No claims for loss or damage shall be valid unless the package, inner cartons, packing and contents have been preserved until made available for inspection by Parcel Pro or the Insurance Underwriter.
As always, the devil's in the details.
Any definitive answer from still regarding opening casebacks?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Noticed a few lately can buy pass it. Does not say eBay authentication was a 116610LN unworn 2018 stickered other day 9k buy it now. Was sat there for a day or so and sold
Not sure how this happen
Sent from my SM-A325F using TZ-UK mobile app
If you offer collection rather than postage only, then it will bypass it.
I see the sub I saw was postage buy it now. Without eBay authentication
Sent from my SM-A325F using TZ-UK mobile app
Last edited by bokbok; 27th January 2023 at 00:42.
Check the seller location, I’ve noticed a couple from Northern Ireland and Europe for sale and these seemed to by pass authentication
Just passing on my first experience of buying an expensive watch via eBay and also my last.
I purchased a watch from a dealer on eBay and the authentication service have rejected it and refunded me. The seller seems genuine enough and frustrated as the only reason given is 'doesn't seem authentic'.
I've had an unsolicited call from eBay today just to check I understood what had happened and they explained that in cases where they have concerns beyond listing anomalies or a doubt that say a buckle is genuine, they won't expand on their reasoning as that will only educate those who seek to deceive. He confirmed they do remove the case back and that the authenticators are very experienced.
I suspect the seller may have been a victim here too but better safe than sorry so whilst I'm disappointed I have to think that the system has worked to my advantage here.
Last edited by deepreddave; 15th February 2023 at 12:23.
Thereby compromising the WR?Just passing on my first experience of buying an expensive watch via eBay and also my last
I purchased a watch from a dealer on eBay and the authentication service have rejected it and refunded me. The seller seems genuine enough and frustrated as the only reason given is 'doesn't seem authentic'.
I've had an unsolicited call from eBay today just to check I understood what had happened and they explained that in cases where they have concerns beyond listing anomalies or a doubt that say a buckle is genuine, they won't expand on their reasoning as that will only educate those who seek to deceive. He confirmed they do remove the case back and that the authenticators are very experienced.
I suspect the seller may have been a victim here too but better safe than sorry so whilst I'm disappointed I have to think that the system has worked to my advantage here.
I think it's been suggested they pressure test afterwards but equally would you buy a watch on eBay and rely entirely on the seller's reassurance re WR? Maybe, maybe not. It seems a step in the right direction to me but not a perfect system.
Sounds positive and maybe saved you.
Why do you say your last time using them?
I wonder how they deal with a monocoque watch case. Quite a lot to go wrong there before you have sight of the movement
I’d never buy a watch knowing that someone potentially barely qualified has taken off the back with a random spanner, compared it to a picture of what it should look like inside then screwed it back together. And the way things are going nearly everything mechanical is £1500+. Ok I’m possibly exaggerating but having had plenty of experience of ham fisted AD’s removing bracelet links etc and making a right bodge, I’d never buy a watch that’s been subjected to this type of treatment. Or sell it through them either now I think about it, especially if it doesn’t sell but has been taken apart so they can have a rummage.
I don’t think anyone removes casebacks with spanners chosen at ‘random’........why would you? Selecting a tool that fits is far more likely to prove successful.
I too have concerns about casebacks being removed in this process, far too much scope for disaster.
Just to add to the thread but I have lost any faith with the Authentication process.
I now have two watches where the buyer wants to return citing Watch condition is not per the description.
The first Watch buyer said there was a scratch and the link collar missing. The watch was described as mint condition and the collar clearly showing the photo. In this case I have come to an agreement with the seller.
The second dispute was raised today, where the buyer says the thread is knackered on the crown and was un screwed on arrival, plus there were loads of scratches.
I described the Watch as mint (only bought a few months ago) and crown fully wound in as shown in my auction photos.
So either
(1) The authenticator didn’t properly inspect the Watch or
(2) The the issues were caused by the authenticator or subsequent postage or
(3) The buyer has caused these issues.
Luckily, I took a whole lot of photos before posting and the watch appears scratch free with a screwed in crown.
I just know they will side with the buyer and pass it back to me.
I have two watches left to sell and that’s me done with eBay for high value stuff :(
The same buyer or two different?
Sent from my Redmi Note 9S using TZ-UK mobile app
Two different. The first one I can to an arrangement as conceded that neither of were a fault and I said I would send him some collars after I received some from Seiko.
When I spoke to the Ebay customer service rep, she said that the Watch would be re-checked through the Authenticator and if in the same condition returned to me but if not then returned to the buyer.
I’m suspect it is far easier for the authenticator to send the watch back to me than to generate potential problems returning it to the buyer and saying they are at fault. Returning the watch to me, means I have to sort it out ( potentially getting the crown repaired under warranty ).
It’s a good thing in theory but like most of ebay tending to always side with the buyer.
These are within a week or so of each other? Both buyers got good long history?
Sent from my Redmi Note 9S using TZ-UK mobile app
The second one has a 100% feedback count of 29, with only a few transaction in the last 6 months. The first buyer has 100% feedback count of 1645.
Worrying possibility of authenticators being careless.
Sent from my Redmi Note 9S using TZ-UK mobile app
Well I just had a closer look at the eBay authentication page and it says this..
If a buyer wants to return an authenticated item, your return policy as stated in the listing will apply.
So in my case, it says no returns….
However, in the FAQ it says this -
Buyers can return an item if the seller accepts returns, as stated in the listing, and the return takes place within the seller’s return window, or in the unlikely event the item is ultimately found to be not as described.
So basically the Authentication centre and or Buyer can still knacker a watch and then send it back as not being as described??
The complete opposite of what the eBay customer service rep told me ie I only get the watch sent back to me, as long it is in the same condition as it left the Authentication centre.
I think all in all (and this is probably pretty obvious) stay well clear if eBay unless you accept the one or two trouble makers
Unless they’ve changed their T&Cs:
If a buyer states no returns, then it will be no returns.
The not as described point is null and void once it is authenticated. At that point the authenticity team has verified that it is as described. Hence no further liability to sellers.
If the authenticity team says it’s not as described they will send it back to the seller if that is what the seller wants.
I’ve used it a few times and it worked well.
The only issue preventing me from using it again is postage to the authenticity centre as just cannot find a suitable method that insures correctly.
I found it to work as described above, a buyer approached me about a return claiming the watch had stopped working but after I pointed out it was working when authenticated it wasn't my problem. I suspect it was buyers remorse rather than a real fault.
I have both sold a watch and bought a watch that has gone through the authentication process. The one I sold was turned around by them within about 5 hours, and arrived with the buyer the following day. The one I bought was turned around within 2 days, which I think is their SLA. When received it was very well packaged with additional information on 3 cards. I found it a very painless process, though admittedly my purchase came from a dealer with their own guarantee and insurance certificate providing all the reassurance I really needed.
I don't know what's on the NFC-enabled plastic card as I don't have a compatible device to read it!
Ant
The NFC card links to an online version of the information shown on the rear of the card.I have both sold a watch and bought a watch that has gone through the authentication process. The one I sold was turned around by them within about 5 hours, and arrived with the buyer the following day. The one I bought was turned around within 2 days, which I think is their SLA. When received it was very well packaged with additional information on 3 cards. I found it a very painless process, though admittedly my purchase came from a dealer with their own guarantee and insurance certificate providing all the reassurance I really needed.
I don't know what's on the NFC-enabled plastic card as I don't have a compatible device to read it!
Ant
Last year I bought a Tudor Chrono that passed muster with eBay authenticity team, but on arrival the steel bracelet was a dreadful poor quality fake.
The seller had stated returns not accepted in the listing & wasn't interested in a return for refund, but after a call to eBay to say part of the package was counterfeit I was immediately issued
a return label back to the authenticator and was fully refunded within hours of dropping it off at the post office.
If eBay hadn't had played ball I'd have contacted PayPal or maybe have taken the watch to Kings Hill to get something in writing from them, at the time
I was reluctant to do the latter as Rolex/Tudor may have kept and destroyed fake strap as is their right with intellectual property principles.
As it were, eBay came through on that occasion & fair play to them for that.
Last edited by Chris B; 25th March 2023 at 17:34. Reason: typo
Well despite saying no returns the Breitling is on its way back to the Authentication centre, because the buyer is saying the crown was undone and will not screw back in. In addition he says that the clasp is covered in scratches.
I described the Watch as Mint as it was practically new, so the Authentication centre should have sent the watch back to me, if there were any issues.
But they didn’t, Authenticated the watch and sent it to the seller, who has now raised a “Not as described” dispute and is sending the watch back (via the Authenticator).
Are eBay going to say the Authenticator got it wrong, is the Authenticator going to admit they didn’t do their job properly or even cause the scratches - I very much doubt it.
Good luck. I've just had an email from ebay saying the same thing. I sold the watch as used, detailed photos of any scratches. Buyer has opened a return which Ebay have accepted and will update me in two days after the authentication centre have reinspected it. Hey ho, just hope its in the same condition when I get it back.
Never again.
Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
I feel your pain - its a complete joke !!!
Looks like their rules have changed then.
I wouldn’t use it again if that is now the case and if returns are possible. Opens up a huge realm of undesirable possibilities.
This makes zero sense as the authenticity people are supposed to verify it is as described.
Did both of above posters state no returns?
I would push back unless the rules clearly state you have to accept returns. I haven’t had a chance to re read the rules.
I believe it has changed but there are conflicting statements on the website. For example..
The authenticator should be doing this ..
the authenticator will confirm the item is consistent with the listing title, description, and images. Then, the authenticator will perform a multi-point physical authentication inspection. Finally, a security tag will be attached to the watch.
So in theory they should only be sending to the buyer a watch that in their option matches the Watch description.
There shouldn’t then be any circumstances where the buyer can claim a watch is not as described if the above is done correctly ??
However, there is wriggle room in the following statement..
Buyers can return an item if the seller accepts returns, as stated in the listing, and the return takes place within the seller’s return window, or in the unlikely event the item is ultimately found to be not as described.
And in this the watch will be sent back to the Authenticator where..
If the authentication partner determines the returned item is not the same item, is not in the same condition, or the security tag has been tampered with or removed, it will be sent back to you and the return will be closed
Of course this situation should never arise unless the Watch was damaged to the buyer or the buyer has damaged the Watch.
Worse case scenario for me will be to send the watch backs to Beards for repairing the crown (if it won’t screw back) and then sending the watch to many of the companies online offering a watch refurbishment/ polishing service.
PS does anyone recommend such a company.
That bold part wasn’t in the T&Cs when I last read so yes must be new.
They must have ended up with disgruntled buyers receiving damaged watches with eBay having to take the hit or something similar.
Sorry you are going through this painful process but hope you get it sorted.
Thankyou indeed.
There are some stories on other forums where this situation has arisen and despite the seller supplying photographic evidence that their Watch was perfect before sending to the Authenticator, Ebay have still sided with the buyer and there is no way to contact or challenge the Authenticator decision.
As I said, I have a couple of watches to sell and that’s it as far as eBay goes. Honest sellers have buggar all protection
I bought a Seamaster through the authentication system which turned up with a gouge in the lug. And I mean one that would need significant laser welding. Sales pictures conveniently didn't show the damage and somehow the authenticator thought it ok just to send it on to me. I sent it straight back and refund was processed no problem. But that should never have been sent on to me. I should have at least had contact from the authenticator to show the damage and ask if I wanted to proceed. No way I would have bought the watch if full disclosure had been made of the condition.
Yep, mine stated no returns.
Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
Presumably a solution would be for the Authenticator to take a catalogue of photos before they send it to be used for comparison if necessary. Couple that with x number of standard checks and problem solved
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
