When did the BUYER become responsible for shipping delays?

[BeanAnimal]

That comment that other guy made that it's "your choice" to refund a payment when your item doesn't arrive (fed ex lost it) is crazy. No way that Kind of attitude would last long selling on ebay or even any forum.

There is not attitude, just the reality of how contracts work. The point is only purchase an item if the terms are clear and you are comfortable with them.

There is no legal requirement for the "buyer to be made whole by the seller if the shipper screws up". It may be good business and you may want to it happen, but if those are not the terms that you purchased under, there is a chance that you are SOL.

 

[RockRash]

That comment that other guy made that it's "your choice" to refund a payment when your item doesn't arrive (fed ex lost it) is crazy. No way that Kind of attitude would last long selling on ebay or even any forum.

No, it wouldn't. AR15.COM will ban you and post your personal information in the hall of shame. It's not perfect but it tends to keep people doing the right thing.

 

[BeanAnimal]

The idea that a seller is NOT responsible for delayed shipping is asinine.

The seller is only responsible if the seller agrees to be responsible. So buy from sellers where the terms are agreeable to you and the seller has some type of clear guarantee.

 

[Kodski]

And as a seller I would never accept paypal for that very reason. Have had several bad experiences with dishonest buyers trying to strongarm a discount or force a return (where I eat shipping a fees both ways).

What I'm going to say comes from a business standpoint and my experience as a business owner and means no disrespect in any way.

Sounds like that's a flaw in your SOP's and has nothing to do with the buyer. As a business owner everything you do should be designed to protect you and your cash flow. If you do business with companies like Paypal, then your SOP should include everything needed to protect yourself in this type of situation. Paypal is fair in my experience as long as you have the information and such that they ask for even as a seller. From contracts and agreements to procedures. They should all be thoroughly designed not only fairness for the customers but also your own protection. It doesn't matter what business you're in or what kind of market you have, you will always have customers trying to steal from you. This is part of your business foundation really. Its so common in this society that you can't blame anyone but yourself when you get bit in the rear like that. Many business owners have some sort of experience with this and you'll find they made changes to how they do things to avoid it.

Combine that with the fact 90% of buyers only want to deal with/through paypal, you'll lose more money than if you were to just continue doing business without protecting yourself. IMO a wrong move from a business standpoint.

 

[Sump Crab]

There is not attitude, just the reality of how contracts work. The point is only purchase an item if the terms are clear and you are comfortable with them.

There is no legal requirement for the "buyer to be made whole by the seller if the shipper screws up". It may be good business and you may want to it happen, but if those are not the terms that you purchased under, there is a chance that you are SOL.


Facts are insanely funny I guess

Wow

 

[braaap]

Are you willing to pay the insurance as part of your purchase price?

That’s a scam. Include it in the price but if I see “shipping insurance” or “box charge” I close the page.

Somewhat local place is now offering Shipping Delay Insurance on their auctions for $9.99

Scam. Don’t use them.

I do quite a bit of buying and selling on another online form. If the item I sold is lost or damaged by the shipping company that's on me. If I didn't buy insurance ( btw its almost impossible to actually get USPS or any other shipping company to pay out a claim) I refund the buyer or replace the item. I also own a well pump business and if I fail to deliver on the deal that was agreed upon I again eat the cost. It's good business. Insurance is cheap, if you decide to purchase it, add a extra 5 bucks to the price of the item if your the seller. Ether way the buyer needs to be made whole. If not, a charge back needs to happen and the seller's name needs posted.

USPS is far easier to get paid out than UPS. I actually have 2 insurance claim checks from them on my desk currently.

That is your choice though.



That is commendable.


Only if those were the agreed upon terms of the purchase.

FWIW a chargeback without specified loss terms will fail for most cards. Amex being slightly more lenient. The mechanism is for fraud, not unhappy card users.

Chargebacks are dirty pool if you were not lied to or did not clearly understand the terms. That is why they are typically denied.

PayPal is a whole different can of beans.

Amex specifically states in their terms that a chargeback is for fraud AND consumer protection when unhappy with a purchase. I have used it multiple times. And it’s the reason I only do transactions on my Amex.

I guess I dont consider it a choice. I consider it it the right thing to do. My reputation in life and business means more to me than a few hundred dollars in coral and shipping.

If there was a DOA agreement or guarantee. There is simply no argument to be made. The seller needs to make the buyer whole. New frag or refund.

I have only been on this forum for a short time. The threads I've seen you post I tend to agree with your opinions but on this one I think it a agree to disagree sort of thing.

ETA: I really need to learn how to multi quote on this forum lol.

Every seller worth anything doesn’t even hesitate if provided proof. Lots of really good vendors and sellers here. Some really poor ones. Research them properly before buying.

As a last resort do a charge back. That’s why it’s there. I’ve only had to do that with one vendor here. Never an individual

 

[BeanAnimal]

I guess I dont consider it a choice. I consider it it the right thing to do. My reputation in life and business means more to me than a few hundred dollars in coral and shipping.

Certainly - but not all sellers (even good ones) operate under the same ideals.

If there was a DOA agreement or guarantee. There is simply no argument to be made. The seller needs to make the buyer whole. New frag or refund.

That is a grey area. One could easily argue that DOA in terms of properly shipped items. As in "we sent you a healthy thing". That is (again) why terms need to be very clear.

I have only been on this forum for a short time. The threads I've seen you post I tend to agree with your opinions but on this one I think it a agree to disagree sort of thing.

I don't think we are all supposed to agree on everything.

In any case, I think you and several others may be mistaking my position. It sucks to be on the short end of the stick and most of us would want a seller to "make us whole" but unless those were the terms of the purchase, then all bets are off. I try to be careful about who I purchase from and to understand the terms.

Most "DOA" guarantees in this business do not include a refund for shipping for example. So yeah, your $80 fish and $80 shipping was $160. The fish died, so you get $80 back. Order the replacement fish and it is $80 more in shipping. That is $240 for the fish. It sucks, but that is the way it works for the vast majority if vendors.

 

[yanetterer]

The seller is only responsible if the seller agrees to be responsible. So buy from sellers where the terms are agreeable to you and the seller has some type of clear guarantee.

Sellers are only responsible if they agree to be responsible? I'm sure any company that has had to pay out damages for selling a harmful/faulty product wished they knew that. Just declare they never agreed to be responsible and they are off the hook.

The seller is responsible for providing a coral as described. Contracting out the work of delivering the coral doesn't absolve them of their responsibility. Don't like the risks associated with selling corals online? Then sell locally.

 

[BeanAnimal]

That’s a scam. Include it in the price but if I see “shipping insurance” or “box charge” I close the page.

Why is it scam? Somebody has to pay for it.

Amex specifically states in their terms that a chargeback is for fraud AND consumer protection when unhappy with a purchase. I have used it multiple times. And it’s the reason I only do transactions on my Amex.

I clearly stated AMEX was more lenient. They still however investigate and do absolutely deny chargebacks that don't fit their specific coding reason. The system has been abused for years. It was intended for real disputes not buyers remorse or the princess and the pea behavior. In a case like this where there is uncovered shipping damage, it would likely be approved.

 

[rc8t6353]

I've been Reefing for about 7 years now. It took me a very long time to convince myself to order corals online. And I mean, this last Easter sale was my very first time. Luckily everything arrived alive and ok. Reading thru this thread is definitely teaching me and I'm sure others new to ordering coral online some important lessons. So thank you all!

 

[BeanAnimal]

Sellers are only responsible if they agree to be responsible?

For shippers failure. Yes, the seller is only responsible if they agree to be in their terms of purchase. It may not be comforting and you may not feel it is good business, but that does not change the facts. You are SOL if the seller does not want to cover the loss and the shipper refuses the claim.

I'm sure any company that has had to pay out damages for selling a harmful/faulty product wished they knew that. Just declare they never agreed to be responsible and they are off the hook.

We are talking about the shipper not fulfilling their part of the contract. It is not the sellers fault no matter how much you want it to be.

The seller is responsible for providing a coral as described.

No sir - the seller is responsible for packing it as egreed upon and handing it off to the shipper. If the seller chooses to take on more responsibility that is up to them.

Contracting out the work of delivering the coral doesn't absolve them of their responsibility.

unfortunately, they are not responsible for the shippers actions. If the shipment arrives undamaged and on-time and they AGREED to a certain condition, then their responsibility may pick back up there

 

[19Mateo83]

 

[BeanAnimal]

What I'm going to say comes from a business standpoint and my experience as a business owner and means no disrespect in any way.

I have owned a business for over 20 years.

Sounds like that's a flaw in your SOP's and has nothing to do with the buyer

Yes - the SOP learned through experience is to not use PayPal to accept payment for goods.
I can explain the scam in private, but will not in open forum.

It doesn't matter what business you're in or what kind of market you have, you will always have customers trying to steal from you.

Absolutely. And some systems are more prone to being gamed than others.

This is part of your business foundation really. Its so common in this society that you can't blame anyone but yourself when you get bit in the rear like that.

Well the blame is really on the those who abuse the system, but yes, one has to learn to adapt. Complaining does not fix the problem.

 

[Sump Crab]

Bean animal seems to be a lot smarter than all of us lol. "Technically" if it's not stated in the "fine print" then "legally" I can get away with screwing you lol! Jeez... aren't we lucky to have someone so educated on the nuance of online sales to help us navigate these complexities lol!

Seriously though, has anyone ever actually been part of any online sale - whether buying from a company or individual - inwhich the seller was not responsible for shipping errors? I mean the buyer is buying an item shipped to their door, oh I can hear bean now: "well legally speaking technically your coral did arrive at your door, even if it's 5 days late and technically dead - that's on you bro" lol!

 

[ptrusk]

The seller is only responsible if the seller agrees to be responsible. So buy from sellers where the terms are agreeable to you and the seller has some type of clear guarantee.

Or if nothing is said about when title shifts, and the parties have not indirectly agreed by choosing a delivery term, then title shifts when delivery obligations under the contract are complete (UCC),

 

[BeanAnimal]

Or if nothing is said about when title shifts, and the parties have not indirectly agreed by choosing a delivery term, then title shifts when delivery obligations under the contract are complete (UCC),

Thanks for the response.

Certainly for many logistics type of transactions those terms are spelled out in the contract. In the case of F.O.B. the buyer assumes transfer AT THE POINT OF SHIPPING.

Under the Uniform Commercial Code (Article 2) - FOB is assumed if not other contract is agreed upon. That means that the seller absolves responsibility once the item is handed to the shipper.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Bean animal seems to be a lot smarter than all of us lol. "Technically" if it's not stated in the "fine print" then "legally" I can get away with screwing you lol! Jeez... aren't we lucky to have someone so educated on the nuance of online sales to help us navigate these complexities lol!

It has nothing to do with fine print. It jus the way shipping and responsibility works. You can argue that it is good or bad business.... and I would agree that it is bad business in most cases, but that does not change the legality of it.

Seriously though, has anyone ever actually been part of any online sale - whether buying from a company or individual - inwhich the seller was not responsible for shipping errors?

The OP in this thread for starters.

In most cases it is the default shipping contract that you accept if no other contract is agreed upon. It may suck, but that is the way it is. Luckily many vendors go on and above and do take care of their customers, some without a written agreement saying they will.

 

[Mikeltee]

That's up to the dealer. If you don't like the terms, find another dealer. I've been noticing this more frequently too. The only thing to make it revert back is to vote with our wallets. Most people don't read terms. These dealers need exposed!

 

[JNalley]

So, I've been looking into consumer protection laws in the US because Bean Animal's stance on this was so out on the fringes of reality that I had to see if there was any merit to it...

1) This would fall under the FTC Mail Order Rule, which outlines basic seller responsibilities with shipping. Under that rule, a seller has an obligation to get the package to the shipper in the agreed-upon timeframe. If no specified timeframe is provided, the maximum is 30 days. So, for this basic rule, it sounds like the Seller accomplished this portion of their obligation.

2) Shipping promise: If the seller explicitly promised overnight shipping and the package was delayed, they might be held liable, especially if the item was perishable (live corals do fall under perishable items).

3) Your specific state may have additional laws protecting you with regards to online purchases, you'd need to look those up.

Now to the meat and potatoes of it all. Consumer protection laws in the US generally favor the buyer, not the seller. Also, the seller has extra obligations when considering the perishable nature of coral. It was also the seller's obligation to give details about their DOA policy and what it covers; the ambiguity of "we have a standard DOA policy" actually favors the buyer since the DOA was never furnished. The fact that the shipping delay most likely killed the coral is not in the realm of buyer responsibility under consumer protection laws.

So, Bean Animal, your assessment that the seller has no obligation regarding this specific scenario is totally baseless, if this ever makes it to court, the OP has a better than not chance of winning the case...

 

[braaap]

Why is it scam? Somebody has to pay for it.


I clearly stated AMEX was more lenient. They still however investigate and do absolutely deny chargebacks that don't fit their specific coding reason. The system has been abused for years. It was intended for real disputes not buyers remorse or the princess and the pea behavior. In a case like this where there is uncovered shipping damage, it would likely be approved.

Ya. The shipper pays for it when they buy the label. It has a spot for "insured value." They adjust that accordingly and then charge their buyer.

I do 25,000 online sales a year give or take. I'm already at 15k for the year. So probably gonna be more like 40k this year. Anyways. I charge flat rate shipping. Sometimes my cost is significantly less to someone. 20-30%. Sometimes it is more. In the long run it is a wash. I'm not trying to make a profit on shipping but I have figured it out where I don't lose money. Every year I come out in the black a couple bucks or SLIGHTLY(less than $1000) in the red.

I've never once told a buyer to kick rocks. I reship or refund and file a claim. Currently have 2 USPS checks on my desk. Waiting on a couple from UPS. That is business. I pay for the insurance and they pay me out. Have never denied my claim because I am honest in them. USPS usually approves my claim in less than 3 days. UPS is 7-14 days.

Moral of the story. If the seller says "DOA 2 hours from first delivery" they are responsible. If they say "I don't cover delays" then they shouldn't be bought from. You are paying for an express shipping service. Delays happen but delays are covered. And UPS refunds the shipping cost if that package doesn't meet it's guarantee. So if you are the shipper you cover shipping again too. Because in reality you WILL get paid for the 1st shipping fee that your buyer paid. It isn't fair to make them pay again.