BrickLink Discussion Forum

In Administrative, Walskipper writes:

In Administrative, CE_Anastasia writes:

Dear BrickLink sellers,

As the next step in making sure that we are in compliance with the EU DAC-7 regulations,
we will start collecting additional information from BrickLink Sellers shortly.
To see if you qualify as a Business Seller, please check with Article 8ac of
the EU Council Directive: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021L0514

Information that we will be collecting includes the following:
 - Name of business, 
- Business registration number, including a supporting document. As different  rules
apply for each EU member state, refer to your local authority for directions,
 - Tax Identification Number (TIN), including a supporting document: https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/tin/#/check-tin 
- OSS Number and/ or VAT ID for each country of registration:  https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/online-sellers_en

You may be aware that we already started requesting this from new Business Sellers
last year. For more details, go to our previous forum post regarding DAC-7: https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=332298.
We are now starting the process of collecting this information for all of our
existing Business Sellers.

Existing Business Sellers should add this information to their accounts by December
31, 2024. After submission, documents will be reviewed by BrickLink.

To ensure that everyone’s requests are handled in a consistent and timely manner,
we will be requesting account updates in waves, by country. We strongly advise
our members to add information to their accounts by the deadline for their corresponding
countries. We will be sending out emails with further details and instructions
for each country in accordance with a schedule. We recommend that you start collecting
the required documentation as soon as possible and await further instructions
for how to add this to your account.

Kind Regards,
The BrickLink Team

In Italy, the limit for transactions in a year has been set at 2000 euros, below
which nothing must be declared and it is therefore possible not to have a VAT
number but only a tax code.
I can then get a feedback on the documents to be sent to you and where to upload
them to Bricklink
tank you

2000 euros or 30 orders in a year.
You have more than 30 orders in a year.
You have 71 orders in the last 14 months.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

May 6, 2024 17:04

Subject:

Re: Changes for EU Sellers in 2024

Viewed:

60 times

Topic:

Administrative

In some countries you cannot have a OSS or VAT if you have some specific Jobs

Does this mean these people Will have their shop closed After Dec 31?

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

May 3, 2024 17:52

Subject:

Items discounted up to 99%

Viewed:

126 times

Topic:

Sales

Hello,

at my store I decided to offer a large selection of items discounted, even up
to 99% their initial price. Everything is true and price weren't raised before.

Plus, if you spend more than 200€, shipping is totally free.

https://store.bricklink.com/Shintaku

Thanks

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

May 3, 2024 09:01

Subject:

Re: What is this part really?b

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Help, peregrinator writes:

In Help, Shintaku writes:

And since monopolies aren't good (as also unfair competition, but this you
seem to forget) if you want to keep this conversation going on since is a me
vs you issue, I welcome you to pm me and discuss it without bothering the whole
forum with a totally offtopic argument.

You're the one who's arguing! It really is OK to say that Cobi bricks
are high quality (even in a Lego forum), and silly to compare them to bricks
that are illegal in the EU (Cobi is a Polish company).

After all, I want to add (but you can't modify posts here)...

...why should I think it's wrong talking about clone and competitors here?

I mean, you have always had the chance here to also sell clone and competitors
parts and this is totally alllowaaaah, no it's not any more.

LEGO didn't want us to sell competitors on their platforms (and some whiners
even blamed them and complained about that!) and I'm sure they're super
happy seeing people sponsoring COBI here or other brands! Why not! I mean, they're
totally into supporting competitors.

Sometimes I really question myself over how do some people brains work.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

May 3, 2024 08:54

Subject:

Re: What is this part really?b

Viewed:

30 times

Topic:

In Help, peregrinator writes:

In Help, Shintaku writes:

I am very curious.
Can you explain me your mandatory requirement to come and comment every single
post of mine just for the sake of saying I'm wrong on some topics?
I mean, it's nearly stalking you know?

However, if you can't feel how inappropriate is, I can't teach you.
Same as for the other fella, if you need the urge to continue dissing me for
no reason, pm me please.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

May 3, 2024 08:27

Subject:

Re: What is this part really?b

Viewed:

34 times

Topic:

In Help, yorbrick writes:

All of that you wrote is so wrong on so many levels that I doubt even explaining
you everything would remotely change your mind, so there's nothing more we
can say about this.

It is clear you have no clue at all. Just because you don't like something,
it doesn't mean it is against the law.

Can you list every country where COBI branded bricks are illegal? If that is
over 100 then I will concede that COBI is illegal in most countries in the world.

Just one note: FYI removing some competitors could actually lead in a DECREASE
of the price of LEGO because those competitors deprive the market from potential
buyers. May. Or may not. Your conclusions show once again you're very shortsighted
at business.

Or you don't have a clue what you are talking about. Again. Monopolies rarely
lead to a decrease in prices.

I didn't speak about COBI as illegal (try to quote me, I dare you), I said
that MOST bricks you see are illegal. Which is true. Lepin was illegal. Enlighten
is. And I don't go on because, differently from you, I don't want to
advertise such bricks. But I know what it makes in EUROPE a brick illegal, since
you do NOT have a clue of the topic, but I do.

In Europe all toys must undergo the Communitee Europeenne mark, which is MANDATORY
for all toys. Chinese bricks, for instance, do not have this mark on their toys,
and since it is mandatory, they are totally illegal to be sold in Europe which
have more severe control laws over toys, because, guess what, we do care about
the children's health.

However, still, you lack mere comprehension.

I'm not speaking about wheter is good or wrong to buy such crap (when legal!),
I'm talking about the stuff that it's totally wrong to use THIS forum
to compliment about third party low quality competitors, even if legal.

Would you go to a Ferrari spare parts community and spread your poorly concealed
love for Hyundais? Of course you would not.

There are places in where it fits to speak about some topics, and places where
it doesn't at all.

Making high praises of competitor brands on a LEGO ran site is totally out of
context.

You were wrong saying that the former fellow wasn't complimenting on those
bricks, you are wrong again and I frankly don't understand why you love being
so wrong on so many topics, but you're welcome.

And since monopolies aren't good (as also unfair competition, but this you
seem to forget) if you want to keep this conversation going on since is a me
vs you issue, I welcome you to pm me and discuss it without bothering the whole
forum with a totally offtopic argument.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

May 3, 2024 07:32

Subject:

Re: Should I hit Complete after I got a refund?

Viewed:

27 times

Topic:

Problem Order

In Problem Order, eti writes:

I ordered 3 rare items but received three (vaguely similar) non-Lego items instead
- by mistake, I suppose, because a beginning seller may not know about 1950s
Lego pars.. I notified the seller. They did not reply to my message, which still
says 'unread', but refunded me anyway, so all is well, but the order
still sits on my order page. Should I hit 'complete' because it's
all dealt with, or shouldn't I because the order was not completed?

Yes of course, any order is complete wheter you get the bricks or a money refund
of the missing ones.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

May 3, 2024 07:31

Subject:

Re: What is this part really?b

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Help, yorbrick writes:

In Help, Shintaku writes:

In Help, yorbrick writes:

I was obviously referring to the sentence
"COBI is a very high quality clone".

They didn't say "it's a decent" or something like that.
"VERY HIGH quality" is a compliment. Wheter you agree or not, it's
a fact.

It is a high quality clone. That is a fact.

This behaviour of yours is very damaging to the community.

Which community is my behaviour damaging?

It's really a pain to spend a lot of time sorting bricks separing cheap clones
like COBI and so on from the actual LEGO and encouraging people to keep them
in order to make some small (to nearly zero) profit is not a good attitude for
this platform. I strongly believe that the money you can gain out of selling
stuff like clones (most of them are also illegal in most countries) is a small
amount compared to the time you lose in separing the bricks, converted into money.
Yours is shortsighted business.

So what you are implying here is that no other company aside from LEGO should
be allowed to sell brick building toys. If you buy bulk lots and need to remove
clone parts from them, that is not because of my behaviour. It is because the
people you bought them from had LEGO mixed up with bricks from other brands.
If sorting is an issue for you, then you should check first whether the mixed
lots you buy have clones in.

COBI is not illegal in most countries. That is an absolutely ridiculous statement.
You really do not know what you are talking about.

I believe also that complimenting or giving value to clone brands on this forum
is totally not the right place to do such. People who spend hours in separating
actual LEGO from knockoffs do this because of people keeping on having your attitude.

Many clone brands are of high quality these days. Some surpass LEGO in that their
colour can be more consistent, in some cases molding marks are less visible,
and prints are better quality. Denying that helps nobody. LEGO has had some terrible
quality issues in the past. If AFOLs deny that there are quality issues, then
LEGO would never have to improve where they fall short.

Just because something is not made by LEGO does not mean it has no value at all.
Destroying items because they are not LEGO is wrong. Banning other companies
from producing brick building toys would be hugely detrimental to LEGO fans,
since LEGO could increase the prices even more than they have already done as
they would have no competition. It also wouldn't be possible anyway as LEGO
does not have the right to stop other companies producing similar items especially
where LEGO no longer has active patents for.

COBI is a genuine company that produces its own designs for sets, and produces
many themes that LEGO say they will never produce. It is a perfectly legal competitor
for brick based toys.

All of that you wrote is so wrong on so many levels that I doubt even explaining
you everything would remotely change your mind, so there's nothing more we
can say about this.

After all, everything started from your wrong assumption that the former wasn't
complimenting, so from wrong assumptions it is very unlikely that true conclusion
can come out.

Just one note: FYI removing some competitors could actually lead in a DECREASE
of the price of LEGO because those competitors deprive the market from potential
buyers. May. Or may not. Your conclusions show once again you're very shortsighted
at business.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

May 3, 2024 05:44

Subject:

Re: What is this part really?b

Viewed:

53 times

Topic:

In Help, yorbrick writes:

It is a high quality clone. That is a fact.

This behaviour of yours is very damaging to the community.

It's really a pain to spend a lot of time sorting bricks separing cheap clones
like COBI and so on from the actual LEGO and encouraging people to keep them
in order to make some small (to nearly zero) profit is not a good attitude for
this platform. I strongly believe that the money you can gain out of selling
stuff like clones (most of them are also illegal in most countries) is a small
amount compared to the time you lose in separing the bricks, converted into money.
Yours is shortsighted business.

I believe also that complimenting or giving value to clone brands on this forum
is totally not the right place to do such. People who spend hours in separating
actual LEGO from knockoffs do this because of people keeping on having your attitude.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

May 3, 2024 04:27

Subject:

Re: What is this part really?b

Viewed:

68 times

Topic:

In Help, yorbrick writes:

In another message you feel the irresistible urge to compliment clones on a site
run by LEGO.

They aren't complimenting them. They are implying that COBI parts are not
rubbish that should be thrown away / destroyed and that there are people that
will buy them. Which is true. COBI parts do crop up in used LEGO lots and there
are people that want them. It is incredibly wasteful to destroy items like that
just because they are not LEGO branded. It is far better to pop them in a tub
and sell on as bulk COBI once the tub is full, or bulk mixed clones if they are
with other brands. Obviously they cannot be sold here but that doesn't mean
there is not a market for them, or that they should be destroyed.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

May 3, 2024 03:43

Subject:

Re: What is this part really?b

Viewed:

66 times

Topic:

In Help, zorbanj writes:

In Help, Macaronis writes:

In Help, SezaR writes:

See photos.

Its a part that helps fill the recycling bin.

COBI is a very high quality clone, and there is a market for it.

How ironic.
In one message you say that I handle my business poorly.
In another message you feel the irresistible urge to compliment clones on a site
run by LEGO.

Perfect picture.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

Apr 30, 2024 10:25

Subject:

Re: We should be able to get rid of some users

Viewed:

51 times

Topic:

In Help, peregrinator writes:

In Help, Shintaku writes:

In Help, peregrinator writes:

In Help, Shintaku writes:

What?

Simple: PayPal's TOS about buyer returning items at their own expense doesn't
override EU law

So you are saying basically that PayPal is against the law?

I'm saying that the law takes precedence over PayPal's TOS (and PayPal
will tell you the same thing).

Actually, they did say the opposite.
They said that if the buyer wanted to return the goods, that was at their own
expenses.
And this is not the first time it happens.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

Apr 30, 2024 09:57

Subject:

Re: We should be able to get rid of some users

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

In Help, peregrinator writes:

In Help, Shintaku writes:

What?

Simple: PayPal's TOS about buyer returning items at their own expense doesn't
override EU law

So you are saying basically that PayPal is against the law?

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

Apr 30, 2024 08:55

Subject:

Re: We should be able to get rid of some users

Viewed:

47 times

Topic:

In Help, peregrinator writes:

In Help, Shintaku writes:

No, in my terms there is nothing that prevents package return.
If there is, I challenge you to quote me where.

WhiteHorseMatt was talking about non tracked shipping and stuff, which was totally
off topic. Same as you when stating that my TOS put "contrary information"
which, for instance, is false and I'd welcome here not to state the false
about me as many people are lazy, would not check my TOS and believe you on the
word.

You are right, I confused your response to the buyer with your terms. If you
had sent such a thing to an EU buyer, however....

What?

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

Apr 30, 2024 07:27

Subject:

Re: We should be able to get rid of some users

Viewed:

54 times

Topic:

In Help, peregrinator writes:

In Help, Shintaku writes:

In Help, WhiteHorseMatt writes:

You can't just put it in your terms that no tracking=buyers problem. Particularly
in EU/UK where the distance selling laws are what they are. How do you deal
with right to return?

Actually, this has never been the problem.
I have totally refunded when the shippings didn't arrive.
Your message is totally off topic.

Under EU law the buyer has the right to return a package for any reason during
the 14-day cool-off period for a full refund, including shipping.

Correct.

Arguably by putting contrary information in your Terms you've extended the cool-off period
to a full 12 months. That's probably what WhiteHorseMatt was thinking of.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

Apr 30, 2024 06:04

Subject:

Re: We should be able to get rid of some users

Viewed:

45 times

Topic:

In Help, WhiteHorseMatt writes:

I think you are missing the point by quite a long way.

if one wants to buy from me, at low prices, with immediate shipping and well-made
packaging, he must also accept some things.

This is the problem.

This should really be: If you (the seller) want to attract customers to your
store with cheap postage, you (the seller) must accept that sometimes there will
be a problem, and without tracking (or even with) it will still be on you to
sort it out.

You can't just put it in your terms that no tracking=buyers problem. Particularly
in EU/UK where the distance selling laws are what they are. How do you deal
with right to return?

Actually, this has never been the problem.
I have totally refunded when the shippings didn't arrive.
Your message is totally off topic.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

Apr 30, 2024 03:24

Subject:

Re: We should be able to get rid of some users

Viewed:

56 times

Topic:

In Help, zorbanj writes:

Your buyer doesn't seem unreasonable and you handled this transaction poorly.
You got some good advice on this thread from others, I hope you take it into
consideration for the future.

Also, you're going to have alot of trouble if you ship internationally and
refuse to refund shipping for incomplete orders. You might skate by when shipping
is a few dollars but otherwise this is going to keep happening to you.

Lastly, most buyers don't read the TOS.

I surely had a lesson here and learnt a lot.

I'll explain.

I have spent years updating and revising my TOS so that I can explain exactly
the service I intend to offer. I don't intend to offer different services,
if one wants to buy from me, at low prices, with immediate shipping and well-made
packaging, he must also accept some things.

I have bought hundreds of times on bricklink.
Some sellers ship after 5-6 days. I don't understand why, I consider it a
bad service.
Some sellers ship all mixed pieces in one envelope. I also consider this a bad
service. However, if one or two pieces are missing I can understand it. This
is not a disservice to me. It's enough for me to at least be reimbursed.

So I decided to offer a service equal to what I would like as a buyer.

However, if many sellers, as I see from the answers on the forum, are ready to
run with a handkerchief as soon as the buyer's nose runs, ready to carry
out their every wish like mere lackeys, regardless of the TOS however detailed
they may be, then I understand very well why buyers, feeling spoiled and pampered,
become arrogant and pretentious saying "but I received this treatment there".
I would like to know if in addition to that, the pieces arrived in the USA from
Italy in a few days and packaged as if it were an original LEGO SET.

Then, maybe my buyer would have preferred a slower shipment with all the pieces
inside? Yes, probably he would have. But I find it simply ridiculous that the
forum responses have totally ignored two factors.

The first: that this buyer first asks me for half the shipping costs as compensation
and then, out of annoyance, the entire amount. In my house this is called BLACKMAIL,
call it what you want, I have received private messages of solidarity and I don't
expect to find any more empathy on the forum.

And the second factor, the barrage of insults that I received privately from
this user, as clearly reported, without me having done anything wrong other than
simply not submitting to his absurd demands, this too was totally and beautifully
ignored by the others participants in this discussion.

I see many teachers who come here to give me lessons on what I should or shouldn't
have done despite the fact that I have 3500+ feedback, almost all positive. If
these people like to manage their bricklink in a certain way I'm happy for
them and I don't have the presumption and arrogance of telling them what
to do. My message was just to say that some users, who BLACKMAIL (it's objective
and unquestionable) and INSULT (still objective and unquestionable) are not part
of the Bricklink community as Dan Jezek intended it. It wasn't a message
to ask others how to run my store. If I wanted to do it, trust me I would have
done it.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

Apr 29, 2024 18:50

Subject:

Re: We should be able to get rid of some users

Viewed:

78 times

Topic:

Plus, take a look at the feedback you have posted for ALLOT of people claiming
that they are also scammers, uncooperative, rude, etc, etc. Yet allot of them
have great feedbacks except for the one negative you left for each of them.

I'll just answer to this.

Looking at the last three I called scammers.

1) Has more than 120 among negative or neutral feedbacks.
2) Has a total of -2 feedbacks. -2. Minus two.
3) Has their buying privileges revoked.

These are the last three I called scammers in my feedback.
I think there is actually no need to proceed on and if this is your argument,
I... well I see.

Perhaps you never ran into a scammer.
Happy for you and not ironic here.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

Apr 29, 2024 12:03

Subject:

Re: We should be able to get rid of some users

Viewed:

52 times

Topic:

Sellers shouldn't be able to leave feedback for buyers.

Yeah, so that scammers like this guy can prosperate.

Sorry sir, you are totally entitled to have your own opinion, but you don't
understand that bricklink is also a social network (here we have also the picture
collage, the MOC area, and so on).

I personally think, if you compare Bricklink to Ebay, that though you've
been here for 20 years, you don't understand the goal that Dan Jezek created
this for.

Author:

Shintaku

Posted:

Apr 29, 2024 12:01

Subject:

Re: We should be able to get rid of some users

Viewed:

38 times

Topic: