posted on March 31, 2001 08:49:29 PM
I know I'm in the minority here, but I actually DISCOURAGE buyers from getting insurance on items won for less than $16, and I charge a HANDLING FEE of $2 if they do. I have a busy full time job, and don't have time to wait in 30 minute Post Office lines to submit insurance forms on $5 and $10 items. IT'S JUST NOT COST EFFECTIVE. I would gladly send a refund on lost or damaged items. However, in over 700 sales in nearly 3 years, all but one of my packages have arrived safely.
posted on March 31, 2001 09:04:34 PM
The courts are opening the floodgates to buyers making fraudulant claims. I've noticed that when the government tries to protect the "victims," the "victims" learn to take advantage of the system.
As far as I'm concerned when I hand the package over to the PO, I've got a receipt for proof of delivery, and the responsibility lies on the PO. If not, the PO could just start stealing packages and sell them on ebay (oh wait, don't they already do that?!)
posted on March 31, 2001 09:09:46 PMTwo cases here where monies were taken and according to buyers - the product was never sent out.
And what proof did the buyers offer to show that the product was never sent out? Did the buyers offer any proof that they actually did not receive the product, or is it a generally accepted practice to assume that buyers never lie and that sellers always do?
posted on April 1, 2001 03:42:43 AM
The logic behind a seller being responsible for delivery is that the seller can better control shipping and can spread costs of a loss.
Delivery Confirmation from the USPS is more than confirmation of shipping, the item is scanned in at the point of delivery by the carrier, so it is proof of delivery, which the buyer must overcome in the case on non-delivery.
posted on April 1, 2001 08:33:54 AM
The Uniform Commercial Code provides that the seller's responsibility ends when duly delivered to the shipper. HOWEVER you need proof that the item was in fact delivered to the shipper. Delivery confirmation is in fact that proof. And it DOES in fact hold up quite nicely in court.The generic receipt from your po with city state and zip only proves you mailed something to someone in that zipcode---MUCH less likely to hold up in court.
What it can't do is protect you from negative feedback which can potentially cause bidders to shy away from your auctions costing your business untold amounts over time.
It can't protect you from charges that the bidder wasn't warned that they needed to purchases insurance---make your tos clear and to the point folks.
It won't protect your bidder from filing for the ebay insurance ---- such a filing in some circumstances can cause your ebay account to be suspended. OUCH.
I include UPIC insurance in my stated shipping and handling charge. No muss no fuss.
Regarding DC as opposed to PO receipt- I'm not sure what the difference is. DC just shows that a package was scanned at a particular PO along with a date and time. A PO reciept shows that as well as the weight of the item and what class of delivery was purchased. Isn't there more information on a PO receipt than DC?
The clause on the Prepaying Consumer Buyer is of particular interest.
You might also want to see the ARTICLE I revisions because they include "important" safeguards for "protecting consumer interests and fundamental policies:"
The UCC changes don't bother me too much because I either insure my packages or assume the responsibility for them.
But the FTC is kicking around some guideline revisions that make me nervous. They're talking about adding disclosure requirements I feel are oppressive and heavy-handed. I think the FTC's new guidelines could be potentially more sinister than anything in the UCC.
