posted on March 13, 2001 07:41:34 PM new
Okay ... here is a fun question.
We had an auction close this evening with a winning bid well over $1,000.00 ... and, naturally, the winning bidder is a newbie with 0 feedback.
The payment options listed in the auction do say we accept personal checks, as well as money orders/cashiers checks. Would we be totally out of line to request that this bidder pay by money order or cashier check because of the value of the item and their lack of a track record? What if we offer to reimburse them for the cost of the money order or cashiers check?
posted on March 13, 2001 07:50:45 PM new
we all had 0 feedback at one time. your auction states personal checks so take the check, just make sure it clears first.
posted on March 13, 2001 07:53:13 PM new
As long as the newbie follows your TOS I see no reason to insist otherwise. I've had a lot of newbies bid and buy. Of course not as high priced. They have to start somewere.
posted on March 13, 2001 08:07:14 PM new
If sellers expect buyers to abide by their TOS, then sellers should not change their TOS after the fact.
You said you would accept a check, so accept the check, if that is the way the buyer wants to pay. But, unless you state other wise in the TOS, hold the check until it clears.
posted on March 13, 2001 08:11:40 PM new
If you want to state payment terms for low feedback bidders, you should do so when you list the item. I have a clause in my TOS for check holding on users with low feedback.
posted on March 13, 2001 08:15:47 PM new
In one area I bid and buy in there are always new bidders. They flock in because ebay is increasingly the only source for the items.
This might be the only time they shop on ebay. Gotta get that widget.
I do as Reddeer advises: Hold the check until it's cleared.
I don't think it's fair to change TOS on a bidder.
I am dealing with a seller right now who has pulled a fasty. I hate giving negs, I hate giving negs...but if I get one, I will drop one all over his a$$.
Sigh
posted on March 13, 2001 08:16:41 PM new
Just to clarify one point ... I specifically asked in my initial post if it was out of line to REQUEST they pay via money order/cashier's check ... even offering to reimburse them for any additional costs they incur. I do realize that it would be unfair, and probably unethical, to INSIST they do so
Yes, we were all new at one time. I sell a vast array of merchandise, and often don't even hold shipment of lower-ticket items for a check from a newbie to clear.
Thanks! I really do appreciate everyone who has taken the time to respond
posted on March 13, 2001 08:23:30 PM new
In this situation I would consider it good business practice to request a money order. I would assume you would do this in the nicest possible way. The newbie customer quite possibly will be more than understanding.
posted on March 13, 2001 08:26:12 PM new
You can also try giving your bidder an incentive to pay via cashier's check, money order, or Billpoint/PayPal (if you take either) ... like offering to pay for shipping and insurance if they use any of these methods to pay.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:27:53 PM new
If you request a MO, you might even want to "pad" the incentive a bit - maybe $10-20 off if they pay with a postal money order (can you buy them this high?), or reimbursement of charges +$5 if a bank money order. I don't think anyone would be angry if you made this offer.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:42:55 PM new
Personaly if I was the winning bidder on an item with a high winning bid like that I would only pay with an escrow account.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:42:59 PM new
We like to browse the "Big Ticket" items around here, and the statement Surf always brings up is "Yeah, but look at the buyer's feedback! (0)"...My usual response is.."How many $200,000 yachts do you expect them to buy to "build" that feedback!"...
I wouldn't worry too much, but last time I listed a "High Ticket" item, I changed my TOS to BidPay, MO or Certified Check ONLY...you may want to consider that for future auctions just to save your nerves.
Keith
I assume full responsibility for my actions, except
the ones that are someone else's fault.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:59:28 PM new
If you decide to accept a check, I wonder if it might not be prudent to call the bank to be sure the funds are available? ("I just received a check for $1000 from Joe Buyer, account #1234567, and I wanted to be sure he has sufficient funds to cover it." ) Oftentimes the phone number of the bank is printed on the check. If it's not, there must be a fairly easy way to get it, possibly directory assistance -- ?
Obviously, a stop payment could be put on the check, or the funds withdrawn before it hits their bank, but if the funds are there when you call it might give you a little peace of mind.
[ edited by triplesnack on Mar 13, 2001 10:04 PM ]
posted on March 13, 2001 11:08:58 PM new
Triplesnack has it right. Call.
Don't insult the buyer by offering to pick up a .50 MO. It does show distrust and naiveté.
Be professional about it and don't outwardly geek about the amount they paid.
After the check clears run into the backyard and scream your head off with glee. If the neighbors call the cops at least you'll have bail money, and they will have to work for another two weeks to get the 1000 you made on a click.
posted on March 14, 2001 02:32:51 AM new
Saffyland, triplesnack has a very good idea in calling the bank to verify funds. You can probably search for the bank name on the web (directory assistance will cost you).
I'd like to expand on the advice given based on my years in banking (Note: I worked in California, and I don't know if laws vary from state to state--I wouldn't think so since banks are federally regulated, but I can't be held responsible if this advice doesn't work for you.)
1. I know some of you have experienced late returns, but I believe the correct (legal?) policy is that checks MUST be returned no later than the day after they hit the bank. Delays might be caused in some of the following ways: (a) If your bank is small (interbank exchanges of paperwork might not get the priority that large banks do); (b) credit unions/small banks may have their work processed by a larger bank creating a "middleman" delay; (c) your bank/credit union may automatically redeposit items, which doubles the amount of time it takes to get a check back; (d) the USPS decides it doesn't like you.
2. It's fine to verify funds when you have the check in hand, but what REALLY matters is when it hits the bank. Make a copy of the check and call the bank again after a few days to see if the check has actually cleared.
Here's an example: You get a check from Susie Creamcheese drawn on ABC Bank. You deposit a check on March 12. On March 15, you call ABC Bank to see if the item has cleared Susie's account (provide account #, check # & dollar amount), and ASK WHAT DAY IT CLEARED!!!. ABC tells you that it cleared on March 14 (there were sufficient funds in the account). IMPORTANT NOTE--I believe that any time during March 15 (the day after the night it cleared), the check can be manually returned even if the computer says that the check was deducted from Susie's account!!! (There may have been sufficient funds, but a bank employee notices that the check was unsigned or forged, or another item may have rejected for some reason that the bank prefers to pay over YOUR check, etc.)
Here's the REALLY important info: If you had called on the 16th and they said that the check cleared on the 14th, make sure to ask them if there was by any chance a credit to Susie's account on the 15th in the exact amount of the check in question (this would indicate that the check was manually returned instead of being automatically rejected for a stop payment or insufficient funds). AS FAR AS I AM AWARE, THE BANK CANNOT RETURN THE ITEM AFTER THE 15TH (the day after the evening it posts to the customer's account) OR IT RISKS BEING CHARGED BACK WITH A LATE RETURN!!! If it takes you 30 days to get a check back from your bank I really believe it's not the fault of your customer's bank. (You could try disputing the check as a "late return," and I THINK the customer's bank would then have to prove that they returned it in a timely manner.) CAVEAT: If the bank returns it manually, they have to make up a deposit slip for the customer. If someone makes a mistake in encoding the account number on the deposit slip (putting the computer numbers on the bottom), it will reject and won't post for one or more days. You could always wait until the 10th day to call and then ask all of the above info.
Also, make sure to get the name of the person you speak to and the date and time you called. Keep this info with the auction in case you need it. If you hold shipping for 10 days, it wouldn't hurt to call the bank again before you mail out the package, just to be on the safe side.
Sorry this is a bit long, but I hope this clarifies some issues for those who are unfamiliar with the way banks work. If someone out there has any questions, just reply here (I'll turn e-mail on).
Saffyland, I hope this transaction works out OK, and I'd think twice about accepting personal checks for big-ticket items!
Without eBay, I might have a real life...
[ edited by mcbrunnhilde on Mar 14, 2001 02:42 AM ]
[ edited by mcbrunnhilde on Mar 14, 2001 02:42 AM ]