posted on April 9, 2001 08:07:18 AM
I realize I'm just in a crabby mood, but WOW has this morning been frustrating!
First, I only include insurance costs on items that are fragile. All other items I leave it up to the buyer. Yes, I know I might be taking a chance, but so far no problems. I state both in my TOS and in my EOA email the additional cost of the insurance. This morning a winning bidder Paypals me her winning bid and then emails me that she wants insurance but only included an additional 85 cents because "that's all it costs to insure up to $50.00". Please tell me WHY does she think I said it costs a $1.10 if it only costs 85 cents??? I'm just shy of 500 positive feedback with no negatives. She has 85 with 3 negatives. Why, oh why does she think I'm making up the $1.10 fee? Of course, it's only 25 cents and I'm certainly shipping her item today anyway. But, when I calm down, I do want to email her to alert her to the rate increases of January 10!!!
OK next, in my TOS I ask that out-of-US bidders please email me for a shipping estimate before bidding. Mostly so they won't be shocked by the amount if they are the successful bidder. Of course, only a very small percentage actually do and I accept that. Then in my EOA email I clearly state that the quoted shipping fees are for US buyers only and that out-of-US bidders please email for their correct rate. This morning I got a reply from one of my winning bidders who's email was a dot com and I had no idea he was in Canada. First he states that he's waiting on another item to end and since he prefers to do his banking all in one day, he won't have my payment in the mail until Thursday. Then he says unless he hears back from me, he'll assume the US shipping charges are the same for Canada. Why would he assume this??? Did I not give him enough warning that they would NOT be the same??? He was the winner of a 3 pound book. Instead of $5.15 or $2.20 US, it will be $8.95 or $7.20 to ship to Canada. Why wouldn't you, as an out-of-US bidder, NOT want to know this ahead of time? Wouldn't you want to take this into consideration when you bid? He only has a feedback of 5, so know I have to give him some slack, but geez Louise, open your eyes and read!
These to bidder emails really got to me this morning. OK, I feel a little bit better now! Thanks for listening!
posted on April 9, 2001 08:27:47 AM
Before the latest rate hike, ins from the PO was 85 cents.... Your buyer isn't "up to date".
As for the Canuck wanting something shipped for the US postage price, at least you found out before they mailed the payment. As for why... I couldn't tell you, they should know both countries PO's want a cut of the pie.
posted on April 9, 2001 08:34:56 AM
I understand your frustration! I had a similiar experience on friday. All my auctions have fixed s/h prices included in the auction description. The s/h for this item was $2.50 for USPS mail, with the item shipped in a bubble mailer. The high-bidder responded back..."You can just stick it in a regular envelope and send it first-class for $.55. If I don't hear from you within 24 hours, I will send payment with this new price." (arrrggghh!!!!) First of all the item is too large to fit in an envelope.... Second, it weighs enough that it will cost $.77 for postage... Third, I will not ship it out unprotected and have this creep tell me it was damaged (hence the cost of the bubble-mailer). Finaly... he sent this e-mail out friday evening... I normally check my e-mail ONLY during business hours. It was only by chance that I checked it Friday night. If I hadn't, his time-limit would have expired by the time I checked my e-mail on monday. Where do these bidders get the nerve to try stuff like this?!?!
posted on April 9, 2001 08:44:17 AM
Yes it can be but it can also be very rewarding. Thats why we stay. As to why do people do what they do, no one ever reads the tos.
Some days i wonder why i even bother to write one at all. Just tell the canadian that postage is a tad more.
Now you just sit back and have a nice hot cup of java and you will feel better.
