posted on April 29, 2001 11:39:47 PM
I am so sick and tired of reading comments from sellers who disavow any responsability for an item that's lost or damaged by saying "you should've paid for insurance".
What a cop-out!
As a seller myself, I take FULL responsability for my items. If they get lost or damaged, I deal with it. If an item is valuable, I include the cost of insurance in the final total--and state so in my description.
There is no negociation about it. WHY? Because if the item is lost or damaged, I am the one who will be making the claim---NOT the buyer. And if the buyer says they don't want insurance, I state that the cost of it is part of the deal--as is stated in the description. If they still do not include it in the total, then that's the same as short changing under any other circumstance.
I wish my fellow sellers wouldn't wash their hands so quickly of a bad situation.
posted on April 30, 2001 12:18:35 AM
I also do the same. In my TOS I state S/H of $2.00 and that includes insurance. Sometime when the price is really low I do offer it with or without insurance and I give the buyer the option but not to often. Something that isn't breakable I do but nothing else. I as a buyer don't buy insurance unless it is a highend item but it is never included in my price I pay or do they offer it in their TOS. If the Seller would say Postage and insurance is a certain amount I would pay that. I think this question is like what came first the chicken or the egg. Like you I, feel responsible for the item until it reaches the buyer.
posted on April 30, 2001 12:55:28 AM
Actually, insurance is the BUYERS responsibility.
In the vast majority of my auctions I make it clear both in my auction ad and in my seller notice that insurance is an option. But it is a high cost option, especially for items under $10, though some still request it.
For very fragile items I state in the auction ad itself that insurance is *required* on the item.
At the current outrageous prices for insurance to automatically include it as a S/H charge would exclude alot of buyers, including myself, and place the seller at a competitive disadvantage.
I do not have seperate S/H charges, and I refuse to purchase from sellers that do. Even if it includes insurance. As a buyer I believe that should be my option on all but the most fragile items.
posted on April 30, 2001 01:12:26 AM
I do what snakebait does. On small dollar items LOW cost shipping is often my selling advantage. I buy small dollar items. I look for very low shipping and NO handling. If it costs more, I can drive to the store or spend a Saturday afternoon walking around the fleamarket. My customers can do the same.
T
posted on April 30, 2001 01:44:25 AM
I have to agree with snakebait and jt. But, I see it as more of an option for buyers, rather than a responsibility, per se. Let me explain...I see the buyer as really the person who is driving the auction. If, as a seller, I place a whole bunch of stipulations and requirements on the sale of my item, this could drive a potential buyer away. If this happens, then what is the seller left with? Payment of the listing fees and no sale.
I prefer to give the buyer the option of purchasing insurance, and in my TOS I state that insurance is "highly recommended". I also remind the buyer again in my EOA email. This gives the buyer the feeling that they have a sense of control over the outcome of the sale. I think that a number of bidders, especially newbies, have the feeling that they have little control when it comes to online auctions...they can bid, send off their money, then hope everything works out well. I think this is evidenced by the number of overbearing or "nervous nelly" bidders that have surfaced recently.
Just my 2 cents worth....
"Who's tending the bar? Sniping works up a thirst"
posted on April 30, 2001 02:43:11 AM
It is the buyers responsibility to get payment to the seller. If the P.O. eats it, or the goblins gobble it up, too bad. Send it again. I ain't shipping until I get paid.
I don't understand sellers who agree with the above statement 100%, but think that their responsiblily ends at the post office. It's a two way street.
As a seller, if I mail out a low dollar item and it gets lost, I eat it. I will refund or make good on the sale. If it is a high dollar item that I can't afford to lose, I will state in my TOS "I recommend insurance as I can not be responsible for items lost or damaged by the post office." This may or may not be "legal", but at least it lets the buyer know where I stand. IMHO simply "offering" insurance doesn't cover it.
posted on April 30, 2001 03:31:41 AM
You cannot "force" a customer to pay for insurance. I state in my auctions that insurance is highly recommended, and it's their OPTION to choose or decline insurance. I will NOT be held responsible for the post office losing or damaging their package. Since when can we control what the post office does with the package? Once I drop my package off at the post office, the package is out of our control.
I recommend all my customers get insurance, but I only about 5% of my customers actually pay for insurance. If they DECLINE to pay for insurance, I will NOT be held responsible.
As a buyer, I pay for insurance if I want it. If I was to purchase an item and decline insurance, I would never hold the seller responsible for loss or damage just because I was too cheap to pay for insurance. I would take the fault 100%.
posted on April 30, 2001 03:56:27 AM
One thing I neglected to add before...and at the risk of restarting the whole "Delivery Confirmation" argument...I do require DC with all of my sales. Why? Because for .40 I can show my buyers proof of shipping and when it was shipped. Also, I can easily find out if the package made it to the buyers local PO. Now, I know that there isn't true tracking with DC, but you know what? Ever since I made DC mandatory, I haven't had one buyer claim that they didn't get their package. Maybe slow, but never lost. Funny, don't you think?
And another thing...there are a number of buyers who are under the false impression that they are buying from Amazon.com when bidding at Ebay. Yes, we all strive to conduct our online sales in the most business-like manner...but guess what? Not all of us are "big" business. Most of the bigger Internet-sales companies charge shipping costs that more than pay for actual shipping, plus materials, plus labor. They rarely pay for insurance...if a package is lost or damaged, they'll replace, and then take it up with the shipping company later. They deal in high volume, so their voice has a better chance of being heard when complaining to the shipping company.
What attracts most of the buyers to Ebay? A wide and plentiful array of goodies, some not found easily anywhere else, for a good deal. To keep prices down and make the customers consistently happy, we should also strive to keep shipping costs down. As a buyer in the past, I want the item packaged well, shipped the way the seller said they would, and I want that DC number so I can check myself to see when the item was shipped. What I don't want is insurance forced upon me for an $8.00-$10.00 item. I want the option offered to me, and the decision mine alone. If I choose not to purchase insurance, then that's the choice I have to live with.
Having babbled on like I did, I have to say that in the past I have heavily suggested insurance on high priced or easily damaged items. In fact, I've even paid for it out of my pocket...rare, but it has happened
"Who's tending the bar? Sniping works up a thirst"
[ edited by koto1 on Apr 30, 2001 04:03 AM ]
posted on April 30, 2001 04:00:50 AM
This topic comes up over and over again. No one answer applies to everyone. There's a big difference between a $5.00 blouse and a $500 piece of jewelry.
blondesense - You said that....
[i]It is the buyers responsibility to get payment to the seller. If the P.O. eats it, or the goblins gobble it up, too bad. Send it again. I ain't shipping until I get paid.
I don't understand sellers who agree with the above statement 100%, but think that their responsiblily ends at the post office. It's a two way street.[/i]
There's one big difference. The buyer has zero cost ways of getting the money to the seller (PayPal). If the money 'disappears', it can be tracked. A check can be put on hold. A money order can be traced. A payback can be put on a credit card. Granted, none of these are probably cost effective for a low-cost item but they have that option.
Personally, I sell mainly clothes and books. I 'strongly recommend' insurance for items over $10.00 (and require delivery confirmation which is part of my standard shipping charge).
No one 'set of rules' is appropriate for all people in every situation.
posted on April 30, 2001 04:25:34 AM
>INSURANCE is the SELLER\'S responsability.
This depends on the terms of sale.
If the terms are FOB: destination, title (ownership) of the merchandise does not transfer to the buyer until it has been delivered, and in this case, yes, any insurance is the responsability of the seller.
If the terms are FOB: origin, title to the property transfers once it has been placed in the hands of the carrier. Insurance is the responsability of the buyer.
While these terms may not be the Norm on ebay, they are widely used by people who make their living selling and shipping merchandise. There is nothing dishonest about using terms like this.
posted on April 30, 2001 05:06:05 AMINSURANCE is the SELLER'S responsability.
NOT!
Unless other arrangements are made (and from a seller's standpoint they never should be), the default delivery method is FOB Origin, which means ownership of the item passes from seller to buyer once the item is accepted by the carrier. This is indisputable.
Why should a seller be responsible to pay for insurance on someone else's property? When you buy a new car, does the dealer pay to insure it? When you buy a house, does the seller pay to insure it?
posted on April 30, 2001 05:11:41 AMIf it is a high dollar item that I can't afford to lose, I will state in my TOS "I recommend insurance as I can not be responsible for items lost or damaged by the post office." This may or may not be "legal", but at least it lets the buyer know where I stand.
It's legal AND ethical.
[ edited by dubyasdaman on Apr 30, 2001 05:12 AM ]
posted on April 30, 2001 06:11:40 AM
I also feel responsible for making sure my customers either get their merchandise intact or their money back.
Most of my items are low-ticket, but if I did sell higher end items, you can bet I'd either include insurance in the total due or pick it up myself.
As it is, I don't force insurance on anyone or even recommend it. On the rare occasions when a buyers requests it, I honor it and include it in the total due. And on the rare occasion I do make a big ticket sale, I pay for it myself.
posted on April 30, 2001 07:51:15 AMAs I predicted...
Seller after seller is denying ANY responsability for the item "once it is accepted by the carrier".
Such BS. What a cop-out.
Nice customer service!
If a regular store sells to you through the mail, THEY take responsability. They either charge you for insurance or not, but THEY take the responsability of making sure the item not only gets to you, but gets to you in one piece. You oughta try that sometime. It's called "merchant integrity".
I wouldn't have the audacity to tell an upset buyer "sorry, you should've bought insurance!"
Rule of thumb: If YOU cannot afford to replace the item, or do not want to return money in the event of a loss or damage, then CHARGE FOR INSURANCE or PAY IT YOURSELF! Insurance is to make sure YOU are covered---not the buyer.
It is YOUR responsability to get the item to the customer in a safe and sound manner.
posted on April 30, 2001 07:55:30 AM
Rule of thumb: If YOU cannot afford to lose the item, then don't ask the seller to send it uninsured because YOU are too cheap to pay the cost.
posted on April 30, 2001 08:07:47 AMSeller after seller is denying ANY responsability for the item "once it is accepted by the carrier".
There is a good reason for this. The seller HAS NO RESPONSIBILITY once the item is accepted by the carrier. This is in accordance with the law and it is indisputable.
Some will make the argument that the seller should be responsible after shipment for the sake of customer service. I won't disagree with those who feel this way. Customer service issues are up to each individual seller to decide (within the law and ebaY rules of course).
But the title of this thread doesn't deal at all with customer service issues. It states that sellers have a RESPONSIBILTY to insure the customer's property. This is simply incorrect. The law is very clear on this.
It is YOUR responsability to get the item to the customer in a safe and sound manner.
Incorrect again. It is the seller's responsibility to deliver the merchandise to the carrier, at which point ownership (and risk of loss or damage) is tranferred to the buyer.
[ edited by dubyasdaman on Apr 30, 2001 08:10 AM ]
posted on April 30, 2001 08:18:08 AM
Laptopper
Go over and place a bid on an item with the us postal service auctions. Then see what they tell you about insurance. It gets lost or what have you, too bad.No pay, no play.
posted on April 30, 2001 08:48:36 AM
From the original post..."As a seller myself, I take FULL responsability for my items. If they get lost or damaged, I deal with it. If an item is valuable, I include the cost of insurance in the final total--and state so in my description." I think that I would be a tad p**sed off for a seller to automatically put the cost of insurance into the price because the seller thinks the item is valuable, as opposed to requiring insurance for all items. There is a big difference. It is called control. What you are trying to do here is control the buyer as to what you think is valuable. Insurance is an option, period, unless it is in your TOS..."I require insurance on all items purchased through my auctions." rather then you picking and chosing what you feel to be an expensive item. EG hit the nail right on the head, as did koto1 with the DC. It is bigoted to say that a seller is shirking their duty because they do not slap insurance in a willy-nilly way to the products they send out, and insult to injury, to what they feel is an expensive item. And also why would you be the one to make the claim if something is lost or damaged? If an item is insured, I copy the insurance slip and then send the original to the buyer, and have them take the item and the packinging to their post office, and out of over 700 transactions, and 2 broken items, they got their insurance money right away, and I just sent them the cost of the shipping they had sent me in the first place to ship the item. Each person runs their business in the manner that works for them. Another thing I have heard of is people that require the buyer to send money to insure, and then do not, and take the chance the item will arrive ok, and just pocket the money. Quite a tidy sum for a side business. If the item gets broken, or lost, then and only then would the seller start the process for a claim. Could this be it?
posted on April 30, 2001 08:57:45 AM
>As I predicted...
>Seller after seller is denying ANY responsability for the item "once it is accepted by the carrier".
I don't speak for anyone else here, but what MY post simply stated was that it *depends* on the terms in the sale. FOB Origin DOES place the responsability on they buyer once it has been shipped.
Would you *gladly* accept responsability for an Item shipped to, say, Mexico (with their god awful postal system)?
posted on April 30, 2001 09:01:37 AM
>I think that I would be a tad p**sed off for a seller to automatically put the cost of insurance into the price because the seller thinks the item is valuable, as opposed to requiring insurance for all items.
But I would bet you would expect the seller to "make it right" if something happened in transit. I would be glad to send a $1000 item with no insurance, but I would not (and would make sure the buyer understood that I would not) accept responsability if the buyer was too cheap to insure it.
posted on April 30, 2001 09:11:27 AM
I don't feel it is the Sellers responsibiltiy to Insure items, but if it's offered I take it and if not offered I ask for it... then if the seller refuses to insure the item, I hold them responsible for delivery to my door.
And will neg in a heart beat for "lost" package not insured bye the seller who refuses to insure MY item.
Ain't Life Grand...
posted on April 30, 2001 09:20:04 AM
Buyers- when you read the listing, did you see the section titled "Shipping", where it states "Buyer pays fixed shipping charges"? Did you read the item description where it states $X.XX for insured shipping? Ok- you did, but in order to save yourself a little money, you ask me to send the item uninsured. No problem- I'll do what I can (within reason) to accommodate your shipping requests, but if I send the item without insurance, be aware of the fact that you will be responsible for damage or loss, not me. Now, do you still want the item sent uninsured? If your response is "Yes, I'd like you to send the item uninsured", you got it- it's in the mail. Three weeks later, and you have received no package? I'll be glad to file a missing mail form with the post office. Refund? I don't think so.
posted on April 30, 2001 09:25:58 AM
IMHO: I have shipped out hundreds of items in the past two years. Only one ever got lost and it was an insured package going to an APO address overseas. It took 5 months for the PO to admit it was lost.
I have never had a package get lost within the US, even sent book rate, untracked and uninsured.
On small, inexpensive items I give my customers a choice if they want it shipped priority with tracking for $4 or standard for a buck (or even free in an envelope). Of course I state that they assume all risk. They can not pay with any service that can be charged back, like Paypal, they must use check, money order or achex.
On more expensive items, they must take priority with confirmation. On digital cameras, they must take signature required.
Insurance is always optional. If they take it, I don't insure it. I will replace it if it does not get delivered. I have only had to do this once.
With that one exception, I have never had a charge back or complaint about non-delivery or damage. I have never had a bad check. Have I been lucky to only run into honest customers (hundreds of them) or are the reports of fraud exagerated?
posted on April 30, 2001 09:26:11 AMmicrobes"But I would bet you would expect the seller to "make it right" if something happened in transit." No, there you go assuming something someone else would do. If I felt I wanted insurance and asked for it, or it was offered and I declined, and something happend to it in transit, I bite the bullet and take the full resonsibility for not getting the insurance. PERIOD! Now as twelvepole said, if I asked for insurance and the seller refused to insure it and I paid them to insure it, and it got lost and the seller did not make it right, that is another story entirely. It is then the sellers responisbility to make it right, since I requested and paid for the insurance and did not get it!
posted on April 30, 2001 09:48:04 AM
WOW! this is getting a little heated!
Here is the way I look at it, and by the way I am a seller who also buys quite heavily.
The seller and buyer have a choice of shipping carrier. If they 'choose' USPS (default) they thereby make the post office a third party in the dealings. Neither party has control over the speed, accuracy or care used in this service. (even Priority often takes a week or more). The USPS makes all the rules for EACH SERVICE THEY OFFER, it is up to the buyer to select what level of speed (right!) and care (RIGHT!) they hope to receive. I strongly feel it is up to the seller to OFFER, but not to force or pay for themselves for services such as DC, insurance, Priority, Express, as seem warranted.
The seller is responsible up to surrendering it into the care of the post office, the post office is responsible for the custody of the package until delivery to the customer. The customer is responsible from that point. Unhappily, it is the customers decision as to HOW responsible the post office will feel when the package is lost or damaged. Pay insurance, they accept responsibility, don't pay they will just stare holes through you.
I would gladly hand carry and deliver each and every tiny widget if I could. Of course I can't. Neither can I be responsible for the postal machinery in Detroit, Tampa, of Los Angeles. Heck, I can't even be held responsible for behind the wall here at my local p.o. once I hand it over!
UPS is a nice alternative for some items, $100.00 insurance and tracking are included.
Mom, try to keep a level head. Otherwise you look so much like your father's mother!
posted on April 30, 2001 10:34:02 AM
immykidsmom>Not heated at all. Just stating our opinions, which is what this service is all about. You and I said basically the same thing, except it took you more words to say it. I clarified, simply and to the point, using a "purely business decision" approach to the entire scenario. I bend over backwards for my customers as my feedback bears out, but by the same token, I refuse to roll over and play dead when I too am a buyer as much as I sell, and something is foisted upon me that I have no say in. As a buyer, I dictate what the item is worth to me, both in bidding and insuring it. If you have an item that is worth $1.00 and that is all you care to get for it,and I pay $50.00 for it,because it is something I have been searching for forever, and finally found it, I don't think that you are going to scream if I pay the $50.00 and get insurance because I want it and pay for it. Right? And this statement "Mom, try to keep a level head. Otherwise you look so much like your father's mother!" I have a level head and the statement was rude and uncalled for.
posted on April 30, 2001 11:29:24 AMThe seller HAS NO RESPONSIBILITY once the item is accepted by the carrier. This is in accordance with the law and it is indisputable.
It seems to me dubyasdaman that there are at least three people on this thread willing to dispute this statement.
First of all, I have not found anywhere on ebay that addresses the situation of lost packages. Secondly, I don't know what "law" you are speaking of; I don't know if it applies to individuals selling on the internet as opposed to legal carriers or shipping companies; and third, I seriously doubt that very many people on ebay know about it either.
My point is simply: There is enough dissention on this topic that the smart seller who feels that their responsibility ends at the post office should make this very clear before shipping! The time to clarify this is [/i]before[/i] there is a problem.
I'm not saying that the seller has to pay for insurance, just spell it out to your buyers beforehand that you are not responsible if they decline it.
I would much rather say "I recommend insurance as I can not be responsible.." in my TOS than to deal with an irate buyer who is screaming "Where is my stuff!!!"
posted on April 30, 2001 12:11:21 PM
furkidmom:
>No, there you go assuming something someone else would do.
To a point, I was, and shouldn't have.
The main point I was trying to make is that while I will assume a certain amount of responsability, past a certain point (of value) I won't. You said "because the seller thinks the item is valuable, as opposed to requiring insurance for all items." On $10 items insurance is just plain silly. On $1000 items, insurance is very smart.
Sniping works up a thirst"
