Non-delivering inworld stores

[kiramanell]

I'm getting real tired of inworld stores not delivering. This is the so-maniest time I spend, say, $500, here or there, only to get screwed by non-responsive store owners on non-delivery. The most lame about this, however, is Linden's attitude towards it. They simply brush you off with, "I'm sorry, but any inworld transaction is just a resident-to-resident matter." And then they point you to some rule in the EULA, telling you they don't have to take any legal responsibility. I'm sorry, but that's just crap. Any virtual system that facilitates selling items for real money (yes, Lindens represent a real-money value) should take some sort of responsibility. Period.

And yes, I know about buying on market place, but not every inworld store has a marketplace equivalent. And Linden knows enough to take your inworld money to send to the seller, so there's nothing preventing them from sending a wee transaction ID back to the buyer, except... yeah, what exactly?

Yep, I'm p*ssed, can you tell?!

- Kira

[Ariel Vuissent]

I've noticed others complaining of this, but can't recall having the experience myself; or at least, if I did, it was so easily solved that it doesn't stick out in my memory. LL won't get involved because it doesn't really affect their revenue until you stop buying $L all together. It's been a fairly consistant issue for many that LL doesn't seem to really care about their customers/users. There's a lot they won't do to help you; and more they'll only do if you're a Premium member, which seems silly. Basic account holders have many of the same issues as Premium account holders, but are held in much lower regard because they don't pay a regular fee. I, myself, have never been a Premium member, but have at this point spent hundreds (likely even thousands, though I don't like to think about that!) buying $L. Still, I can't get the same service as a Premium account holder.

But anyway, that's my own personal rant. If you're not getting any response from the store owners (after a reasonable period of time, perhaps a few days), you're certainly not obligated to shop there again. Often the fault lies with a non-responsive/malfunctioning vendor. On top of that, the store owner may not have recieved your message(s), particularly if they haven't been on for a while or have many people contacting them. It's not at all unusual for messages to be lost in transit because one's inbox is full. The SL inbox is ridiculously small.

As for marketplace, it's no less flawed - in fact, often more flawed - than inworld deliveries. I haven't had problems inworld, but can't tell you how often I've had problems with the marketplace.

[Zanara Zenovka]

Comes down to crappy vendors/vendor setup, negligent merchants - there's no excuse for not having IM to email enabled.

Sheesh - I managed to spend 2 months travelling in Central America and still do support via net cafe every other day - it's not that hard.

As for verifying money transfers, this has finally become available - http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Second-Life-Server/Upcoming-LSL-feature-llTransferLindenDollars-and-transction/td-p/1239275 - although what you're really needing in this instance is to verify the delivery and issue a refund if it doesn't happen, which is still not yet possible.

Best you can do is actually look for evidence that the merchant is active and involved in their business before you toss money at them. Anyone who actually cares about their business doesn't let these things happen.

[Ry0ta Exonar]

---

   Zanara Zenovka  wrote:

Best you can do is actually look for evidence that the merchant is active and involved in their business before you toss money at them. Anyone who actually cares about their business doesn't let these things happen. 

---

QFT and we always have to bear in mind If the deal sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

[Sassy Romano]

---

kiramanell wrote:

I'm getting real tired of inworld stores not delivering. This is the so-maniest time I spend, say, $500, here or there, only to get screwed by non-responsive store owners on non-delivery.

---

 

As a customer, I wholly agree with you.  As has been stated, the only thing you can do first is to assess the merchants activity PRIOR to purchase.  I know this spoils the opportunity of spontaneous purchase but if it matters, send an IM first, if they don't respond, you know they either don't want to or didn't take the small amount of time to forward IM's to email.

The stance of "My IM's are capped daily, I lose your messages" is simple to mitigate with IM's to email and for those who say "I still lose some", how many?  Isn't it better to do all that can be done rather than shrug and say "I lose your messages"?

Either way, send an IM (or NC), if you get no response, you know where to spend your money.

[Paladin Pinion]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

send an IM first, if they don't respond, you know they either don't want to or didn't take the small amount of time to forward IM's to email.

---

This is good advice, but not until after LL fixes the latest bug where IMs aren't being delivered. I have been trying to respond to a customer for over a week and none of my messages are getting through. If a customer is having trouble and the merchant is unresponsive, I hope they read JIRA. It may not be the merchant's fault.

[Dougg2]

I purchased a couple hud at Meike  for 950 L    wasent delivered, sent notecard and IM to owner, also sent notecard IM to the person they say is handling the store, no reply.  Seems like there should be a way for Lindens to investigate this gype of thing.

 

 

[Sassy Romano]

There is, it's called a "support ticket", file a support ticket.

[WADE1 Jya]

Yeah I don't like that this happens lots cause I know it gives all SL merchants a bad rep where people can start to wonder why bother shopping. It's the kind of thing that can even make new people stop engaging in SL... before they get chance to discover all the good stuff!

I think Second Life needs some basic regulations for consumer protection. Its just asking for sad times when there is zero accountability, nor consequence built into the system, and absolutely zero barriers from being a 'merchant'. Easy is good, but it has been made too easy.

I know that's an unpopular opinion but :matte-motes-whistle:

Compare the way Linden Lab doesn't manage the merchants in SL to the way Apple tightly manages vendors on the App Store... and then compare the popularity of these two places as a shopping destination. The difference in success is quality control.

I see these things in SL as proof (contrary to popular theory) that a deregulated market does not sort itself out. Things tend to sink to the lowest common demoninator. For business to really thrive it needs good rules & enforcements to protect both buyer & seller.

[Maj Mode]

i have just about given up shopping in SL due to this happening on numerous occasions...i bet if i walked around with a tag saying "this *insert creators name here*are thieves '' LL would soon ban me. there seems no protection for consumers in SL. It is a simple case stealing...if the message says i have paid who ever surely they can see it isnt a lie.

 

[Sassy Romano]

---

Paladin Pinion wrote:

This is good advice, but not until after LL fixes the latest bug where IMs aren't being delivered. I have been trying to respond to a customer for over a week and none of my messages are getting through. If a customer is having trouble and the merchant is unresponsive, I hope they read JIRA. It may not be the merchant's fault.

---

It doesn't even have to be a bug but could simply be that the customer has capped IM's.  In the present state, LL should *really* consider changing the system so that IM's from avatars are never capped.  By all means cap object -> avatar IM's but not avatar -> avatar.  It makes no sense and turns a form of communication into an unknown element.

I wholly dislike notecards, I can't easily read them while offline but if someone contacts me by IM, I expect to be able to reply by IM.

Anyway, perhaps the ability to receive money via script should be restricted to those with payment on file and only operational if they log in every n days.  It still wouldn't solve every issue and it's a simplistic approach but it can't be any worse than what we have at the moment where some merchants go absent, leaving behind a swathe of issues.

[nikita Jefferson]

You do what i did, put a bad review in your picks in your profile.

Whenever that merchants name is searched, your bad review also comes up in search because you have  his name in your bad review,

I had numerous people contact me who had the same problem i had with that vendor asking if i ever did hear from him , and some thanking me because they decided not to buy after seeing my review in search

It was a huge yacht i had bought and many parts were missing, i tried for months to contact the vendor without any luck.

As for me, i have an inworld shop and i will do whatever it takes to satisfy my customers, which i do

[PeterCanessa Oh]

---

Maj Mode wrote:

...there seems no protection for consumers in SL...

 

---

And none for merchants either.  Copybotters, copyright thieves, failed payments, non-payments on marketplace, marketplace 5% commission followed by non-deliveries and refunds, etc.  Just because you paid something doesn't mean the other person received it, just as most deliveries are sent in good faith but fail to arrive.

The fault is LL's unfortunately.  If you don't trust SL then giving up shopping is the wise choice.  I no longer buy anything on marketplace.