If you used paypal to pay you can try a PayPal "not as described" case

I would have opened up a case with eBay before contacting the seller.

It is probably because he contacted eBay about it first is why they are taking the stance that they are.

I would go to Paypal as already suggested and open a case with them.

I opened the case first as not described. After a week or so he forwarded it to eBay for help like "something is wrong with communication with the buyer".

I think I can't open a case with PayPal when it's already open with eBay. Probably should opened it with PayPal first.

Waiting for the eBay's new response.

But it's funny I should prove it's not working when the seller sold it as untested - I'm doing his work.

When the description of the condition does not match the description of the item - it is always prudent to ask the seller for clarifications.

If you are willing to gamble on an item that you obviously understood was "untested", planning to rely on eBay's protection policies to support you in case things go wrong, you have to take into account that things may not always work exactly the way you expect.

Did you ask to just return the board to the seller? What was the seller's / eBay's reply?

I take “untested” to mean that the seller suspects it doesn’t work - yes they shouldn’t list it as “used” in that scenario but the pull of more dollars makes sellers optimistic.

why don't you post some good high res pictures of the board here, maybye we can spot a broken trace or a leaking capacitor thats a easy fix?

I always read "untested" as "definitely not working".

dr_st wrote:

If you are willing to gamble on an item that you obviously understood was "untested", planning to rely on eBay's protection policies to support you in case things go wrong, you have to take into account that things may not always work exactly the way you expect.

While I do believe OP should have paid better attention, this was an item sold as working, probably by a person intentionally trying to scam people.

Writing working in large text, then hiding away that it's actually not in the description, is exactly what I expect eBay buyer protection to help against.

ZellSF wrote:

While I do believe OP should have paid better attention, this was an item sold as working, probably by a person intentionally trying to scam people.

Writing working in large text, then hiding away that it's actually not in the description, is exactly what I expect eBay buyer protection to help against.

I think your assumption is unfounded. Where did you see "writing working in large text", hiding details in the description? Did you make that up because you automatically assume the seller is a scammer? It can be just as well someone not versed in the details of what eBay expects the descriptions to mean, especially if it's a new seller, or someone who sells rarely. Note also that eBay's condition description are anything BUT "large text".

From the way the case was presented, I believe the OP paid enough attention and knew that he was bidding on something untested; he just chose not to ask the seller for clarifications, but gamble on eBay buyer protection as insurance; it didn't quite work this time. I hope in the end it works out to the OP's satisfaction.

As others have said, to me untested means definitely broken.

So in the rare case I decide to buy it, it would be because the seller's description indicated there was a good chance it could be repaired or not actually broken in the first place. But that is rare and the price has to be right.

dr_st wrote:

ZellSF wrote:

While I do believe OP should have paid better attention, this was an item sold as working, probably by a person intentionally trying to scam people.

Writing working in large text, then hiding away that it's actually not in the description, is exactly what I expect eBay buyer protection to help against.

I think your assumption is unfounded. Where did you see "writing working in large text", hiding details in the description? Did you make that up because you automatically assume the seller is a scammer? It can be just as well someone not versed in the details of what eBay expects the descriptions to mean, especially if it's a new seller, or someone who sells rarely. Note also that eBay's condition description are anything BUT "large text".

How so? It's their categorization system which is how you find stuff. It's very much the large text (being that people would definitely miss the listing without it) and the description shouldn't contradict it. There's only two reasons why it would: either you're trying to scam your customers, or you can't read yourself. In the latter case, you should refund your customer because that's your mistake.

I've yet to see sellers badger customers for extra $$ or returns on items sold as untested/parts but which turned out functional. With slight tunnel vision you can make a case for it under seller protection.

You bought an item that was obviously listed as untested. "He replied that the board was untested and I had to take this into account when buying it. "

Honestly, I feel you don't have a reason to return the item.

Now if he listed it as tested and working, COMPLETELY different story.

He did list it as working.

The seller should have listed it for "parts or repair".

According to eBay's policies, listing it as used means that it works.

I would call eBay and talk to a live person instead of the dumb email people.

As someone who sells stuff often on Ebay, it is a horribly obscure option sometimes to select between new,used, parts. You have to actively go looking for it sometimes. It is always different because of the category.

Yea, you might technically be correct in trying to return this, but I feel this isn't the right thing to do here.

luckybob wrote:

As someone who sells stuff often on Ebay, it is a horribly obscure option sometimes to select between new,used, parts. You have to actively go looking for it sometimes. It is always different because of the category.

Yea, you might technically be correct in trying to return this, but I feel this isn't the right thing to do here.

I'm fairly sure the seller actively intended to mislead and wasn't just confused by the categories. Even if he didn't, then returning it would still be correct, as then said seller would learn for the future the importance of listing his things correctly.

General rule of thumb; "never attribute to malice what can easily be explained by stupidity or lazyness." At least as a default.

Still no harm in doing a return and teaching the seller to list his things properly.

Yeah, let's be a dick to a guy for making a small mistake in a sale.

I hope I never sell anything to you.