Last week, I won an eBay auction for a $350 lens for my camera. As far as lenses go, not that expensive, but not a piece of plastic, either. Anyhow, the item is shipped Priority Mail with a tracking number and everything. On Monday, I get home and there’s a slip from the postman saying he attempted delivery, but nobody was home, so the package is going back to the post office for pickup.
I go the next day to pickup the item. Hmm. Nothing. “Come back Wednesday” they say. I come back Wednesday. The item is nowhere to be found. They call around different post offices. They check someplace called “the annex.” Nothing. It’s lost, they say.
I look at my shipping receipt and realize no insurance was purchased on the item. I suppose that, despite the fact that I have had it shipped priority mail, and I have evidence of its attempted delivery and tracking numbers saying the same, that I’ve just lost $350 unless it happens to show up.
From the Better Half, 22-year veteran letter carrier:
Yeah, if insurance wasn’t purchased on it, you are probably S.O.L. But…
You could possibly take the Post Office to Small Claims court–he says that 90% of the people who sue the Post Office get something. But…
You’re giving up too soon. Chances are good it’s not “lost” but simply “mislaid” around your home post office, and it’ll turn up eventually.
If someone picked it up by mistake (not really likely), if they had the same name and the same street address, the Post Office might have given it to them by mistake. But…
That’s not very likely. And…
Even if they had, they’d return it, a camera lens not being the 6-volume DVD set of Great Train Journeys of the World that they were expecting, so they’d return it to the Post Office.
So, you’re giving up too soon. He’d call them at least every day, and twice a day would be better, until it shows up. Give them 10 days.
Does anyone else find it absolutely appalling that the Postal Service won’t stand by their own service and will tell you you’re SOL if you don’t purchase insurance. It’s almost like a protection racket. Who else can get away with operating like this?
Rosco’s House Cleaning Service: “Go ahead and pay us in advance to come clean your house, but we might never show up. You’ll be out of luck…unless you purchase some insurance.”
Jimmy’s Builders: “We’ll build your garden wall, but it might never get finished. No refund unless you buy insurance.”
Even UPS and FedEx, which can be the spawn of the devil on other issues, will cover the loss to the shipper if the package is lost or destroyed.
Put the responcability on the E-bay seller. If they can’t prove you received it they have to refund your money. When talking with them they will deny that is the case. When you file a complaint with ebay they can deny all they want but need to prove you received it or refund your money. Even though it isn’t really the sellers fault it’s missing they are the best person to blame to get your money back.
My freind runs a business through E-bay. She always insures shipments over $50 even if the buyer refuses to cover that cost. Then if a customer claims they never received it either the post office can provide a legal signiture from the person who is commiting fraud or refund her money.
I can’t in good conscience stiff the eBay’er with this. There was an option for insurance on the sale. I didn’t notice it and didn’t click it. It’s my fault, not his. So far, everybody else (outside this board) seems to say that the item should eventually turn up. So, cross my fingers.
Wrong. First, the package has tracking proving the package was delivered to the post office. As far as the seller is concerned, his responsibility for the transaction ended when the package was handed to the USPS clerk. It is not the seller’s responsibility to insure that the package is handed to the buyer, that is what the USPS was hired to do. Based upon the rules and regulations that run the USPS, we as customers are given specific rights and options when it comes to the service we purchase. The OP was given the chance to pay for insurance and by his own admission, overlooked this option. The USPS is now the negligent party in this situation, but they have significantly reduced their liability because of their rules.
I did not say it is ethicaly correct to put the responability on the seller. I said you can make a complaint through E-bay that you did not receive the item you bid on. The seller not being able to prove you received it will get screwed out of the money. Even though it is actualy the buyer that should be getting screwed for not paying for insurance. E-bay’s policies are very one sided towards the buyer. In most desputes the seller gets screwed. It’s a price sellers are willing to pay for the advantage of the extra customers they gain through E-bay.
Heh, in a similar conversation with some camera collectors (mentioned in the other USPS related thread in this forum somewhere), it was mentioned that eBay’s rules are very one sided towards the seller and not the buyer. Ah well, I guess it all depends on your experience.
In any case, keep pestering the Post Office about it, as the package is most likely somewhere. If they can’t find it in a week and a half or two weeks, do the small claims court thing. In the mean time, contact the seller on eBay and let him know it didn’t get there, but don’t blame him for anything since we know for a fact it got to the post office in your town. Sometimes the seller might be willing to replace the item for you, or otherwise help you out. Hell, he might just happen to be a Postmaster General or something and decide to go bash heads to find your item (not likely, but it would be amusing )
Out of curiosity, what sort of lens did you buy? Mostly I shoot Universal Screwmount (M42), but I have been contemplating looking into getting a Pentax *istD, in which case I’d have to start using K-Mount lenses or an adaptor.
A Nikon 60mm f/2.8 micro AF (that’s what Nikon calls its macro lenses). A have an older Nikon 55mm f/2.8 micro (manual focus), but it’s not compatible with my D200 (the mirror or something bumps into the rear of the lens when I take an exposure), so it’s about time to upgrade to an autofocus lens. I don’t use the macro that often, but it does come in handy. I do this for a living, so at any rate, if I get it or not, it’s a tax right-off, at least.
Why would I as a seller stand to lose when I can prove that a package was delivered into the custody of a shipper? Once I have properly packaged the item, accurately labeled it for shipping, and handed it to UPS, FedEx, or the USPS, my responsibility is complete. On expensive shipments, I’ll email the buyer with a tracking number out of courtesy, but if it gets lost in transit, that’s a matter for the injured party (buyer) to take up with the shipping agent.
Because based on the time it might take on your side to prove you are in the right will often outweigh the cost of the item.
The argument the buyer can make with ebay since they have not received the item they have no proof that the item shipped matches the item won in auction.
If you pay to have a pizza delivered from a pizza shop and on the way the delivery boy gives it away and never shows up, is the pizza shop not responceable for providing you with a pizza? Would it be acceptable for them to give the the name of the delivery boy and tell you to take up you missing pizza with him?
E-bay effectively treats its sellers as employee’s and buyers as customers. The employee’s always have to make things right for the customer.
Not true, not true at all. Over christmas my company sent out about 1000 packages via UPS. Of those 1000 three were damaged, none were covered due to ‘insufficiant packaging’ In fact they even had the nerve to tell us over the phone and in writing for one of them that two bottles of olive oil were broken but the rest of the items were okay, so they discarded the entire package and we will not be refunded for the damage. HUH??? I questioned them on this one. I told them that on one of the other packages something simlar happened, but the driver picked up the rest of the package (covered with olive oil) put it into a plastic bag, put the bag in a box and shipped it back. The person on the phone told me that they could not do that becuase there was broken glass and a a big mess from the oil so it was hazordous to the driver so they discarded all the contents. WTF!!! So did the driver just leave it on the ground where it was dropped? They had to pick it up right? Why not pick it up and drop it into a box for me instead of a dropping into the garbage. But I digress. Anyways, the point is if a box is destroyed UPS will not always cover the cost, and when they do it’s a pain in the ass to make the claim. Oh, and the above example, not covered even with insurance. Without insurance, I belive all packages are covered up to $100.
eBay is not a pizza shop and the sellers are not employees. Where did you get that idea? Sellers don’t work for eBay; eBay just facilitates trading between buyers and sellers. Both seller and buyer are customers of eBay – it’s a for-pay community centered around an auction service – and the act you suggest is entirely opposed to the spirit of that community.
eBay is not a standard online retailer and the shipping responsibilities are different. Neither seller nor buyer are inherently responsible for lost shipments (unless explicity stated in the auction). And when insurance is offered and not taken, I’d say the buyer is knowingly assuming a bigger portion of that risk. Many sellers will nonetheless replace or refund lost shipments, but they do so out of good faith or because they’re hostages to their feedback rating. In either case, purposedly screwing the seller over for this when it’s not his fault is just plain wrong. The seller should pay because he can’t defend himself very well? I’m sorry, but that sounds like extortion.
Um, the shipper works for the seller, i.e., is the seller’s agent. The package is always the seller’s responsibility until it arrives in the purchasers hands, unless you have an existing contract that specifically states freight-on-board terms – I’m sorry to say the vast majority of eBay seller don’t make any mention whatsoever of FOB terms, and you’ll only sell to fools that don’t understand what FOB is (or buy cheap stuff).
As to offering insurance, I won’t purchase from sellers that don’t include insurance in the shipping and handling charges, and neither should you. Insurance is to protect the shipper, i.e., the seller, not the purchaser. The item, remember, is still the seller’s responsibility until he (or his agent) delivers it to the purchaser’s hands. Simple proof: who makes the insurance claim on such packages? Further ask yourself if you make a purchase from Amazon and you don’t receive your package, who makes it right for you?
As the seller, your job isn’t to drop off a package at the post office. Your job is to make sure your customer receives the package. Insurance is to protect your interests.
So, OP – if you don’t receive your package, it’s not your fault. It’s also not really the fault of the seller, but it is the responsibility of the seller. You don’t buy insurance to protect your purchase. The seller should have purchased insurance to protect himself in case the package gets lost. Yes, the fact that eBay and PayPal automatically provide “insurance” options confuses things in the aim of providing increase revenues for sellers, but that doesn’t mitigate the seller’s responsibility to protect himself and choose capable shipping agents to act on his behalf.
But this is exactly why I said eBay is not a standard online retailer. eBay is not the same as Amazon, and the “traditional” rules don’t necessarily apply. Do you really think the average Joe is as rich as Amazon? Many eBay sellers would not have the resources to offer all the traditional protections to the buyer and the eBay marketplace seems to have accepted that. This attitude applies not only to shipping insurance, but also return policies, item descriptions, etc. Some auctions include detailed shipping and return policies; others including nothing but a one-sentence description of the item and eBay doesn’t care one way or the other. It’s unrealistic to expect the average eBay seller to reach Amazon’s performance levels (although many do strive for it)… from what I’ve seen, a lot of auctions are performed more like garage sales than actual retailer sales.
I would say the seller is only responsible for doing what is listed on the auction (and eBay rules generally seem to agree, stating basically that sellers have to abide by the terms of their listing and deliver the item). eBay encourages users to “work things out” themselves and only gets involved as a last resort. Generally, this means that users tend to be policed more by their feedback rating than by hard-and-fast policies. For example, eBay’s Buyer Protection policy specifically excludes items lost or damaged in shipping and it does not indicate that the situation is automatically the seller’s responsibility, only that the two parties should work it out with each other or with the carrier. The fact that eBay makes insurance optional – and allows either the seller or buyer to pay for it – might be taken as further support for this attitude.
Problems arise when an item is lost and there wasn’t any written policy in the listing. eBay rules state that the seller is responsible for “delivering” an item, but it doesn’t indicate responsibility one way for items delivered to a carrier and then lost by a carrier. If eBay intended sellers to guarantee every step of the delivery process – even once the package is in the carrier’s hands and out of their control – insurance would not be optional. Also, you might’ve assumed that only sellers can file insurance claims? If so, that’s not necessarily true. The USPS requires sellers to file for completely lost packages, but it allows both seller and buyer to file for damaged or partially-lost shipments. UPS and Fedex, on the other hand, allow both parties to file claims for lost packages.
In any case, the argument is mostly moot since it’s clearly the post office’s fault for losing the item, not the seller’s. If nothing else, wouldn’t it be ethically questionable to take advantage of the seller when you know he did nothing wrong?
(The 2nd sentence of the third paragraph should be “…but it doesn’t indicate responsibility one way or another (either seller or buyer) for items delivered to a carrier and then lost by the carrier.”
We basically agree… sellers can accept FOB or some verbosely worded disclaimer that indicates the very simple concept with too many words. Simply “offering insurance” isn’t any indication of an FOB policy; unless there’s very clear, obvious indication that the transaction is FOB it’s still the seller’s burden to bear everything – think contract law (any lawyers here FWIW?).
Even in the event of FOB sales, the shipper is still the seller’s customer; not the purchaser’s customer. This means that while the purchaser assumes ownership once the item is in the shipper’s custody, the seller still has a responsibility to either (1) negotiate with the shipper as his agent; or (2) let the shipper know that they should deal with the purchaser directly. So if something goes wrong, the seller can’t wash his hands completely; he must at least direct his agent to deal with the purchaser.
The vast majority of the auctions on eBay don’t qualify as FOB, and the general assumption should be that they are NOT. Offering insurance isn’t enough to convery the expectation that the item is FOB. Saying something like “I’m not responsible for damage if you don’t buy insurance” I think is perfectly acceptable because you’re cleary conveying a concept.
I had to look up FOB (Free on Board) the Wikipedia article suggests that whoever pays for the shipping cost of the item takes responsibility for is as soon as it is in the hands of the shipping company. And also states that ecommerce is generally all FOB shipping point. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_On_Board . Wouldn’t that suggest that without a written FOB policy FOB shipping point should be assumed for EBAY. Since it is both ecommerce and since the purchaser pats delivery charges?
)