When did the BUYER become responsible for shipping delays?

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

Yeah it would probably be a 100 posts shorter and alot more relevant if not for a couple ignorant souls.

Since it’s your thread, you’re free to “report” any posts that are off topic and ask the mods to delete

 

[MnFish1]

Since it’s your thread, you’re free to “report” any posts that are off topic and ask the mods to delete

Yes - but the OP was a question concerning a discussion about this issue right? Second - anyone can report any post - not necessarily the owner of the thread. The OP wanted a discussion, it's a discussion, right?

From the OP:

I'm a little puzzled on when it became the buyers responsibility to make sure that an ups package gets to their house on time. BUYER'S AND SELLERS can we have an honest discussion/debate on the topic?

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

 

[OrionN]

@MnFish1
@reef_ranch said it best here:

Lawyer here. Under the uniform commercial code, which in one form or another is enacted in every state, Seller is required to deliver conforming goods to the buyer. If it arrives dead, he failed in that obligation. Buyer may reject tender of delivery and recover the purchase price. The parties may by express agreement alter this allocation of risk, but it must be clear and unambiguous. That was not done here. And no thoughtful buyer should ever accept that risk.

Standard DOA policy means seller eats it if it arrives dead. A chargeback will likely be honored by the CC company and its a definite win in small claims court. Venue is in the location of delivery, so you can get a judgment in your home court cheap and easy. If Seller wants to dispute venue, he can pay for a lawyer to do so. Unlikely, since the cost will exceed the value of the coral. As the buyer, your biggest risk is collectability. The Seller's biggest risk is reputational.

Standard DOA guarantee: it is the seller who has responsibility of getting the animal to the buyer alive, unless specifically and clearly change ahead of time that is agreeable to both parties. There is nothing unethical about the the seller business practice, if it is clearly stated and agree by the buyer prior to the transaction, which was not done in this case,

 

[MnFish1]

@UMALUM , we still want to know who the vendor was...

You would realize then - that this entire thread could be moved to the vendor forum.

 

[OrionN]

You would realize then - that this entire thread could be moved to the vendor forum.

and no one else can post other than the seller and buyer.

 

[MnFish1]

@MnFish1
@reef_ranch said it best here:

Standard DOA guarantee: it is the seller who has responsibility of getting the animal to the buyer alive, unless specifically and clearly change ahead of time that is agreeable to both parties. There is nothing unethical about the the seller business practice, if it is clearly stated and agree by the buyer prior to the transaction, which was not done in this case,

There is no legal doctrine that I'm aware of - that says a seller is automatically responsible for a shipper problem - when both the buyer and seller have agreed to have the item shipped with a vendor that offers no insurance and no guarantee... Right(i.e. there is not a definition of a standard DOA guarantee)? The problem here is this package is totally different than many - in that it is living - and neither the seller nor the buyer have much control in the situation of a shipping delay. Let's remember - I said - thats my opinion after being both a buyer and a seller - and that as a seller - I would have refunded or replaced the product for the buyer.

 

[MnFish1]

and no one else can post other than the seller and buyer.

Yes - that was my point - the OP asked for a discussion - and when you start mentioning the vendors - as requested by another poster - that will derail the discussion. PS - do you have a picture of the red gigantic?

 

[OrionN]

@EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal

 

[MnFish1]

As a customer though, I'm not signing or even aware of that 'no claims' agreement that you the vendor have agreed to without any additional recourse in the event the vendor fails to provide services within the SLA you've paid for. Sounds like you've agreed to accept the liability from Fedex for a discount, but don't want to actually accept it so you've written a policy that protects you and not your customers. That's a choice.

Personally I would have red lined the heck out of that contract before sending it back, while calling different vendors to work with.

Nice tank!

 

[OrionN]

@MnFish1
You should read what the lawyer @reef_ranch wrote on the message of his that I quote.

 

[MnFish1]

I own a guitar store, and ship hundreds of thousands of dollar's worth of gear every year. So Im coming from a sellers perspective. The moment you decide to to sell something then ship it, is the moment it becomes your responsibility as the seller that the buyer receives the item it the condition promised regardless of what it is. If the seller tries to dodge his/her responsibility, move on to someone who will do the right thing.

Right - absolutely - and as a seller you would buy insurance to guarantee that you can re-imburse the buyer - OR - just plan as a case of overhead that xxx $ per year will be DOA due to shipping (since shippers do not cover/insure living goods) - thats the difference and the problem Right? I know it sounds like I'm favoring the seller - in fact I'm criticizing both - the seller shouldn't have treated the buyer that way - and the buyer should have asked more questions (and as already posted - I have a very expensive experience with this exact issue)

 

[OrionN]

We are going around and around said the same thing over and over. I guess I don't have that much time to waste. Again, it is near mid night here. Goodnight.

 

[MnFish1]

Curious - is there in R2R seller rules that list the 'standard DOA policy'? If so - that is your answer.

 

[MnFish1]

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.

Same question to you - where are live fish covered? in credit card agreements. I tried a charge-back - and received this answer - (paraphrased) "the seller shipped what you ordered, there was a weather related delay which could/should have been expected as a possibility due to the weather at the time. You received coral which you ordered despite knowing the weather in your locality. Both parties are responsible - and we recommend you work it out on your own". Now - this was multiple years ago - and laws might have changed - IDK

 

[MnFish1]

@MnFish1
You should read what the lawyer @reef_ranch wrote on the message of his that I quote.

I did. It supports both sides depending on the exact wording/communication between the 2 people.

 

[OrionN]

@MnFish1
It is @gig 'em Red Gigantea. His pictures here

 

[MnFish1]

@MnFish1
It is @gig 'em Red Gigantea. His pictures here

Beautiful!!!!!! Thanks

 

[OrionN]

 

[OrionN]

I did. It supports both sides depending on the exact wording/communication between the 2 people.

this bit?

Standard DOA policy means seller eats it if it arrives dead.