SUBMIT A COMPLAINT

PlayerAuctionsosrs accounts, id's 5116775 and 3918996

Review updated:

I purchased 2 OSRS accounts on separate occasions, both were recovered with original account creation information that was never provided to myself.

I opted for the insurance PlayerAuctions offered and put forward a dispute for the account recoveries. Not only did I provide screenshots of our messages on the website where both times the sellers openly admitted recovering the accounts, but the seller in the second instance actually sent pictures of him logged into the account openly admitting he had access to it where I did not.

In both instances (The first where the seller admitted recovering it and the second where the seller showed screenshots of being logged on where I could not) PlayerAuctions closed both in favour of the seller with zero thought process, claiming there was insufficient evidence.

How much more information does a website need than an admission of guilt by the seller?

Utterly disgraceful site, you will be ripped off. The insurance is to squeeze more money out of you but NEVER benefits the buyer. I will attach some interesting screenshots to show how one sided the site and company are.

The 4th picture was sent by the seller, who had recovered and access the account to show it had been banned, he recovered it to his own email to do this.

The 5th and 6th pictures are a seller denying ever recovering the account, and then after I had provided evidence they admitted it. I advised in my appeal that I could not trust the account seller after he recovered the account, that I wanted a refund and to return the account.

The seller did not provide login information for the account he had sold, the appeal was denied by PlayerAuctions despite the seller openly admitting recovering the account and the account was never given back to myself, the user has never responded since.

Again, absolutely disgusting approach that purely cover PlayerAuctions scamming practice, I emailed them asking for evidence that made the decide to ignore the admission of account recovery and even liability for the recovery and got a cookie cutter response back in the final picture.

PlayerAuctions
PlayerAuctions
PlayerAuctions
PlayerAuctions
PlayerAuctions
PlayerAuctions
PlayerAuctions
PlayerAuctions

  • Updated by BenCannibal, Oct 01, 2019

    Richard,

    I really am struggling to not let out an audible sigh having to respond with the same information repeatedly.

    5116270 - You DID receive additional information that the account is inaccessible, the screenshots I provided on my post here show;

    1. That the account email, and password used on the login screen are not only incorrect but not mine
    2. The screenshot provided by the seller shows him LOGGED INTO THE ACCOUNT FROM HIS END.

    I have repeated this no less than 4 times, PLEASE acknowledge that you understand. The additional evidence was provided by the seller himself and both you and your team have decided to overlook this.

    The account was banned through an IP ban, this account along with it. If you're saying my purchase of the account meant that because it was banned it now belongs to the seller who took it with information he had not provided me. Look at it a different way, if i'd bought a car, crashed it and the seller turned up with keys he hadn't told me about and took it back would you say that it was on me and that the seller had the right to do so?

    3918996 - The items being stolen would not be the tipping point to whether or not you gave me the insurance money I paid for when the account was recovered. It may have given some context but the point still stands that it was recovered, with my money on it and stolen and you simply allowed it to happen and closed the case in the sellers favour.

    "He was able to earn the disbursement for this because when he was able to give you back the account, the cases already ended by then" - This is a fantastic way to say "We cut our losses when we thought we didn't have to pay the insurance".

    I provided screenshots from the seller OPENLY ADMITTING he had recovered the account with original information he had not provided, which you as a company did not investigate before allowing the sale to go through. The sale happened I believe 6 months after the purchase and the insurance covered me for 365 days, what you are saying is incorrect.

    The cases had not ended at any point, in fact the dispute was still open after I advised I was not happy the seller had simply recovered, rinsed and then offered the account back after I claimed a refund.

    So another analogy since this is so "Similar" to the other case. I buy a car, the seller comes in in the night and steals the exhaust, the steering wheel and the windows. I claim a dispute and he offers me it back without these things since he also had access to the car with a secret set of keys that you chose not to verify.

    Would you say that, while that dispute was open and the decision still hadn't been made the "Case had already ended by then" despite the dispute still being open? Or would you actually look at the facts and continue with the dispute?

    You did not suspend him as a courtesy to ME, because I lost my money and the account I purchased with said money. You suspended him as a courtesy to PlayerAuctions. You claim the evidence was 'insubstantial'...

    I provided screenshots of;

    1. The seller openly admitting he had recovered the account.
    2. Proof that the sale was not legitimate as the information provided was not sufficient to not have it recovered, later proven in the appeal
    3. Proof thereafter of him recovering the account BEFORE the dispute was over.

    If this was court you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. All information submitted according to your Terms & Conditions clearly outlined on your website indicate in both instances you were liable for providing the buyer with a refund. Instead, even here you've added additional points that you felt 'Might have swayed' your company but in
    reality you have refused to accept responsibility and have set a clear precedent to any potential customers.

    PlayerAuctions have proven both here an on their website that they have absolutely zero interest in holding up their end of their T's and C's. Insurance is to rinse money out of you, account sellers can and will recover accounts. PlayerAuctions will side with them and there is nothing in place (Where the insurance should have been) to protect buyers.

    Thank you Richard, had you offered the refund since both accounts had been re-claimed by sellers you had approved for selling this would have been a positive post but I believe now people can see exactly how your company works.

Be
Sep 28, 2019
Sort by: UpDate | Rating

Comments

  • Pl
      Sep 29, 2019

    Hello Ben,

    I was able to look into those two orders, and here are my findings:

    Order 5116270 - with seller fearlesskiller:
    You got the account banned; it was never recovered by your seller and the screenshots you posted here actually incriminate you, as it shows the account was banned through macroing and botting — both of which happened after the sale took place. If these were offenses that happened before the sale, the offer wouldn't have lasted for several days, as the account would have been suspended during then.

    3918996 - with seller brahrker:
    Your seller indeed recovered the account BUT was able to return it to you. Even if it was returned, our team still suspended him. However, you still tried to ask for a refund, but was denied by our team since the account is already with you.

    Under these circumstances, I'm afraid I won't be able to help you as both cases have been carefully deliberated on by our team. The decision stands. Please note that if you continue to extort sellers on the site by still asking for a refund even if the account is already with you, our team may have to suspend your account.

    Best regards,
    Richard

    0 Votes
  • Be
      Sep 30, 2019

    @PlayerAuctionsMarCom Richard,

    Once again it appears the evidence has not been looked at properly.

    On 5116270 I provided pictures of being unable to log in to the account as the details and email address had been changed, it was the seller who provides pictures of being logged in to the account and it being banned.

    To do this he needed to recover the account and log in to the website, these pictures do not incriminate me they simply show what I have stated even here in these pictures, that I no longer have access to the account and that the seller recovered it.

    And again in 3918996 you are incorrect. The account was ABLE to be returned to me, however the account seller recovered the account and removed the bank value I had accumulated on it of around 300m gp which equates to around £170.

    It was only after I messaged the seller after I had found his username on another website that he offered to return the account and assured he would not do it again, but at this point he had already taken everything from the account.

    Not only did I refuse the account being returned but sought to pursue a refund, of which was less than the stolen amount from the account, as I did not trust the seller who had not provided adequate login information.

    You closed the dispute in the sellers favour, he kept the account and DID NOT give me access to it again, and if you believe he was suspended how was I able to message him multiple times over the next few months, and why would you accept his claim allow him to keep the money and the account and then suspend him?

    That makes no sense, and again clear as day it seems like you did not look into the evidence provided and made an incorrect decision.

    If you could provide me with a more adequate response and we can resolve this I would be happy to, but all your response has done has shown that the decision you made was incorrect twice and you've doubled down by providing a misinformed response to shirk responsibility.

    Regards,
    Ben

    +1 Votes
  • Pl
      Oct 01, 2019

    @BenCannibal Hello again, Ben,

    We thoroughly checked your evidences. The fact that I am responding now means I had to check on this again and consult our team about what happened; which means the evidences were checked and discussed about multiple times.

    For order 5116270, the reason I state the botting/macroing offense screenshot incriminates you is because these are the same points raised by you and the seller. However, after this was raised to our team, we did not receive any counter evidence from you nor any additional proof that the account is inaccessible. Further, the botting offense supersedes the account being inaccessible, since if the account was banned due to macroing/botting, the account would have become inaccessible, anyway.

    For order 3918996, it's slightly the same reason, in the sense that if any of the account contents were stolen or expunged, we didn't get any evidence for it. A before and after screenshot that shows the account contents would have greatly helped, but the team didn't get any. He was able to earn the disbursement for this because when he was able to give you back the account, the cases already ended by then. When you wrote to us that the account was reclaimed again, we suspended him as a courtesy but the refund could not be processed because the evidence during then was insubstantial.

    I'm sorry if these decisions aren't to your liking, and this will be my final response about this matter as I believe the information was already shared to you before, Ben. If you have any other questions outside of this, just write back here and I'll do what I can to help/answer.

    Best,
    Richard

    -1 Votes

Post your comment