When did the BUYER become responsible for shipping delays?

BeanAnimal

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
3,219
Reaction score
4,865
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
All of this is irrelevant if you paid with a credit card. That agreement supercedes any 'policy' a non-lawyer wrote on a post or page. If you push the issue with your credit card company you will prevail.
I would agree if the card is Amex. They are the card and the bank. Anything else it depends on your card vendor, you may have to put in more effort than it is work (of course depending on the amount). Often times you don't know how bad your card vendor is until you have a problem and try to get their help.
 

JNalley

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 12, 2021
Messages
1,924
Reaction score
2,370
Location
Grandview
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
What court? I don't disagree that the outcome of a lawsuit could favor the seller... or the buyer. But realistically the cost to wage a civil suit for a few hundred dollars in loss is not realistic one way or the other.
I am unsure of what you're asking with "What court?"

I also agree, that the cost to wage a civil suit in this particular instance might be a futile action. But imagine this same scenario where the OP now purchased $10,000 worth of coral to stock a new 500 gallon tank. It's not futile then, and it would still stand that since the burden of information is on the seller, and a clear understanding by the buyer was obviously not reached, the seller is at fault, and the buyer would win. No doubt in my mind, not sure if you agree based on your wording there, but it's ok.
Unfortunately the conversation is broadened significantly. My original point was to make sure that you understand the terms you are working under so that reasonable expectations are set.
On this we agree, all parties should do their due diligence and understand the terms of the contract under which they're operating, but, again, the ambiguity of "We have a standard DOA policy" works in the buyers favor, not the sellers. It's on the seller to clearly inform the buyer of the terms, not the other way around.
 

Griev

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 12, 2017
Messages
628
Reaction score
1,410
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
My point is that the seller can dictate the terms and buy purchasing you agree to those terms.

I think the argument came about regarding what the "default" terms are if none are explicitly stated.
Your point is factually incorrect though. While a seller can dictate terms, if you pay with a credit card, both parties are agreeing to the credit card payment terms which generally supercede any other transaction terms explicitly.

I'd be able to successfully charge back under the credit card terms if the seller made no attempt to make it right (notably there's a ton of room for interpretation, even offering a discount can be considered trying to make it right).

They could then sue me for breaching our separate sale terms, but you can sue anyone for anything. That case would be quickly thrown out because of the superceding nature of the credit card agreement.
 

OrionN

Anemones
View Badges
Joined
Jul 28, 2013
Messages
8,813
Reaction score
20,598
Location
Corpus Christi, TX
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
All of this is irrelevant if you paid with a credit card. That agreement supercedes any 'policy' a non-lawyer wrote on a post or page. If you push the issue with your credit card company you will prevail.
Having the credit card backing make it easier for sure. However, if we taking about what is the right thing, it is the seller's responsibility for shipping problem and delay, unless he decline this responsibility ahead of time. If the seller decline this responsibility I would think hard again, and again before I try to buy it cheap, and must have proof that the animals are healthy before shipping. I would not buy if there is any other choice.
 

EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal

Just another girl who likes fish
View Badges
Joined
May 14, 2019
Messages
13,428
Reaction score
19,950
Location
Spring, Texas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Having the credit card backing make it easier for sure. However, if we taking about what is the right thing, it is the seller's responsibility for shipping problem and delay, unless he decline this responsibility ahead of time. If the seller decline this responsibility I would think hard again, and again before I try to buy it cheap, and must have proof that the animals are healthy before shipping. I would not buy if there is any other choice.
Yes, but if the seller specifically says (as in the case) they want pics within 1 hour of arrival, that implies they expect to honor DOA if it arrives dead.
 

littlefoxx

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 25, 2022
Messages
5,914
Reaction score
5,436
Location
Denver
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Yes, but if the seller specifically says (as in the case) they want pics within 1 hour of arrival, that implies they expect to honor DOA if it arrives dead.
Which this seller did say in the listing so they should cover that coral. Had they said that delays are not covered then that would be a different story
 

OrionN

Anemones
View Badges
Joined
Jul 28, 2013
Messages
8,813
Reaction score
20,598
Location
Corpus Christi, TX
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
My point is that the seller can dictate the terms and buy purchasing you agree to those terms.

I think the argument came about regarding what the "default" terms are if none are explicitly stated.


It very well may be, especially if I am incorrect about what "default" legal terms would come into play.
The standard DOA is "get the animal to the buyer alive" which imply health, packing and shipping appropriately. If the seller decline responsibility of shipper, then the seller should so stated. Like: "Not responsible for shipping delay or lost" or something similar. If unsaid, then it is the seller responsibility.
 

BeanAnimal

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
3,219
Reaction score
4,865
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I am unsure of what you're asking with "What court?"
Sorry - the point was finding the proper court to file in to begin with and the insanity that would go along with it,

I also agree, that the cost to wage a civil suit in this particular instance might be a futile action. But imagine this same scenario where the OP now purchased $10,000 worth of coral to stock a new 500 gallon tank.
No disagreement there but even $10,000 may prove to be a drop in the bucket. That kind of goes back to my initial point of doing your homework, especially if the purchase carries that much risk.

I have had my share of bad transactions from less than stellar vendors. In the end, resolution is often far more trouble than walking away. Unfortunate, but reality. In this particular case, the OP may be able to shame the seller into submission, but other than that what is he to do?
 

BeanAnimal

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
3,219
Reaction score
4,865
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Your point is factually incorrect though. While a seller can dictate terms, if you pay with a credit card, both parties are agreeing to the credit card payment terms which generally supercede any other transaction terms explicitly.
Sure, that is the argument that you would make to the credit card company and if they agree, you win. I can't speak to the consumer terms of different credit cards or their vendor terms. That is not what the debate was about.
 

BeanAnimal

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
3,219
Reaction score
4,865
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The standard DOA is "get the animal to the buyer alive" which imply health, packing and shipping appropriately. If the seller decline responsibility of shipper, then the seller should so stated. Like: "Not responsible for shipping delay or lost" or something similar. If unsaid, then it is the seller responsibility.
I don't know what a "standard DOA" is or where it is defined. I would expect it to be clearly stated by the vendor though. In this case it is ambiguous (to me). You (or more importantly the OP) is free to interpret in any way they wish to pursue their claim. The seller appears to be standing firm, so I guess it is up to the credit card company or the OP to decide if it is worth the trouble.
 

braaap

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2015
Messages
939
Reaction score
826
Location
Montana
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
I disagree and have personal experience successfully charging back with a vendor who tried to say their DOA policy didn't cover shipping delays because their 'policy' written on their FAQ page doesn't actually legally supercede the agreements they've made with their payment processors.

Did you know most payment processors don’t allow you to add “transaction fees” to a card payment? It goes against most terms and they can drop you for charging that fee to your customer.

People should read their agreements. Most of this thread wouldn’t be happening if they did.

Not saying you haven’t. Just stating another thing buried in credit card and processor agreements.

I am unsure of what you're asking with "What court?"

I also agree, that the cost to wage a civil suit in this particular instance might be a futile action. But imagine this same scenario where the OP now purchased $10,000 worth of coral to stock a new 500 gallon tank. It's not futile then, and it would still stand that since the burden of information is on the seller, and a clear understanding by the buyer was obviously not reached, the seller is at fault, and the buyer would win. No doubt in my mind, not sure if you agree based on your wording there, but it's ok.

On this we agree, all parties should do their due diligence and understand the terms of the contract under which they're operating, but, again, the ambiguity of "We have a standard DOA policy" works in the buyers favor, not the sellers. It's on the seller to clearly inform the buyer of the terms, not the other way around.

Small claims court. $25ish(cost here) filing fee. If the defendant doesn’t show you automatically get judgement in your favor.

Sorry - the point was finding the proper court to file in to begin with and the insanity that would go along with it,


No disagreement there but even $10,000 may prove to be a drop in the bucket. That kind of goes back to my initial point of doing your homework, especially if the purchase carries that much risk.

I have had my share of bad transactions from less than stellar vendors. In the end, resolution is often far more trouble than walking away. Unfortunate, but reality. In this particular case, the OP may be able to shame the seller into submission, but other than that what is he to do?


Small claims. Very simple process. Would be filed in the buyers home area. If the seller doesn’t show or respond they lose automatically. It cost $25 to file here.
 

OrionN

Anemones
View Badges
Joined
Jul 28, 2013
Messages
8,813
Reaction score
20,598
Location
Corpus Christi, TX
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think for something that is more, like several thousand, small claim court may be the thing to do. In this case, the seller just hope that this thread just died down and not many people know about it.
 

JNalley

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 12, 2021
Messages
1,924
Reaction score
2,370
Location
Grandview
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Bean, I love you brother, but really, you started off on a stance of (paraphrased, and my understanding of your initial replies to this thread) "It's the buyers job to be aware of the situation" when it is in fact the sellers job to make the buyer aware of the situation ahead of time during the initial contract. In our imperfect world, you're correct that unless highly motivated and pushed the buyer usually gets the short end of the deal in such matters, but from a legal standpoint, if he wanted to push, he would win. That's very different from you basically saying he has no recourse. He does, it just boils down to how much time, money, and effort he wants to put into it, and if it's worth it to him to do so. I can say, that if he did, it could set new case precedent and protect more buyers in the future, which wouldn't be a bad thing. It's not really worth it to me over a couple of hundred dollars, but everyone has a different threshold...
 

RockRash

Community Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 20, 2024
Messages
38
Reaction score
69
Location
Norco CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think for something that is more, like several thousand, small claim court may be the thing to do. In this case, the seller just hope that this thread just died down and not many people know about it.
I think people should should hold sellers like this accountable. If everyone did there would be far less problems like this. With the reply of "not my problem" after stating standard DOA and a picture within a hour. I would do everything in my power to make sure the seller didn't get my money ether by chargeback or small claims the amount of the transaction is irrelevant to me.
 

BeanAnimal

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
3,219
Reaction score
4,865
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Small claims. Very simple process. Would be filed in the buyers home area. If the seller doesn’t show or respond they lose automatically. It cost $25 to file here.
You would typically have to file in the jurisdiction that the person or business that you are suing resides in. The rules wildly vary about being in person for filing, or the case, etc. The point being the PITA that it will entail.
 

OrionN

Anemones
View Badges
Joined
Jul 28, 2013
Messages
8,813
Reaction score
20,598
Location
Corpus Christi, TX
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
@BeanAnimal
Standard DOA is replace or refund if Dead On Arrival. The seller need to state exception(s). If no exception(s) stated then all covered.
Exceptions we usually see are
1. not cover shipping (buyer cover shipping of new animal, or refund minus shipping)
2. not responsible for shipping mishaps
3. not cover if proof of death on arrival not given (stated in this case)
4. partial cover only
5. only cover specific number to time, like one replacement only.
6. not cover if not available on delivery, or not unpack right away (1 hr in this case)
I don't think I miss anything else.
 

BeanAnimal

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
3,219
Reaction score
4,865
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Bean, I love you brother, but really, you started off on a stance of (paraphrased, and my understanding of your initial replies to this thread) "It's the buyers job to be aware of the situation"
Thank you, that was kind.

I do stand by that general premise though. Most "real" vendors will have the terms laid out somewhere binding. (Let's ignore the credit card terms tangent). Many vendors will indicate that they are not responsible for shippers errors in the terms of the transaction, however many will still try to make it right.

Buying from some dude shipping corals from his moms garage is a different story. Regardless of the "terms" stated or applied by some default law or shippers agreement, you are likely SOL if the transaction goes bad and the seller does not do the right thing.

In either case, being aware of the situation beforehand will both help you set expectations or decline to move forward with the transaction of the terms are not agreeable.

Hope that is clearer. That is all tangent to my argument about who "legally" is responsible if terms are not agreed upon.

In our imperfect world, you're correct that unless highly motivated and pushed the buyer usually gets the short end of the deal in such matters, but from a legal standpoint, if he wanted to push, he would win.
I think that is highly dependent on the situation, but agree that it is certainly possible and yes a precedent is always a possibility. This very subject is full of case law.
 
Last edited:

BeanAnimal

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
3,219
Reaction score
4,865
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
@BeanAnimal
Standard DOA is replace or refund if Dead On Arrival. The seller need to state exception(s). If no exception(s) stated then all covered.
Exceptions we usually see are
1. not cover shipping (buyer cover shipping of new animal, or refund minus shipping)
2. not responsible for shipping mishaps
3. not cover if proof of death on arrival not given (stated in this case)
4. partial cover only
5. only cover specific number to time, like one replacement only.
6. not cover if not available on delivery, or not unpack right away (1 hr in this case)
I don't think I miss anything else.
I guess that was my point, who's "standard"? I don't think there really is one or that one should be assumed. Most vendors I have ordered from have varying policies. Some better than others and some ridiculous. I would not assume anything, as that means setting my self up for disappointment.
 
OP
OP
UMALUM

UMALUM

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 7, 2023
Messages
379
Reaction score
449
Location
Fl.
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think people should should hold sellers like this accountable. If everyone did there would be far less problems like this. With the reply of "not my problem" after stating standard DOA and a picture within a hour. I would do everything in my power to make sure the seller didn't get my money ether by chargeback or small claims the amount of the transaction is irrelevant to me.
And he will be, I run on principals. If I needed the money I'd be out working not messing around on here.
 

BeanAnimal

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
3,219
Reaction score
4,865
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Did you know most payment processors don’t allow you to add “transaction fees” to a card payment? It goes against most terms and they can drop you for charging that fee to your customer.
FWIW - Now that most states have made these fees legal, some card processors (Visa/Mastercard) allow them and just require the charges to be displayed clearly that the point of sale. That is why you are seeing them more often now. I don't know about Amex, Discover, etc. I don't think can apply to debit or or prepaid.
 

Bubbles, bubbles, and more bubbles: Do you keep bubble-like corals in your reef?

  • I currently have bubble-like corals in my reef.

    Votes: 30 34.5%
  • I don’t currently have bubble-like corals in my reef, but I have in the past.

    Votes: 12 13.8%
  • I don’t currently have bubble-like corals in my reef, but I plan to in the future.

    Votes: 28 32.2%
  • I don’t currently have bubble-like corals in my reef and have no plans to in the future.

    Votes: 15 17.2%
  • Other.

    Votes: 2 2.3%

New Posts

Back
Top