posted on June 13, 2002 11:31:22 AM
For those who have argued, and argued, and argued, ... in the past complaining about us sellers who require insurance on all items (or do as I do and add a handling fee to self insure all items) just read the thread about -- No insurance, out of luck?
You will see the true feelings of ALL buyers -- They clearly state it is the SELLERS responsibility to see the item arrives -- and if given the choice these same people WILL decline insurance. Why not? Why pay? They will just turn around and file a chargeback or contact safe harbor if it does not arrive as they DO all feel it is their God given right to receive merchandise -- lost or not -- without insurance --!!!
This has always been my experience but no one would come forward and say so on the threads regarding excessive shipping. But... let someone start one about a lost item and their true colors shine through.
Believe me, this is the case on every item whether it costs $1.00 or $1,000. To save me headaches I have been charging .50 extra for handling on everything for a year now and I have the money ready and available if I need to make a refund. I see it as a win/win situation. Buyers are covered for less than PO insurance, and I am covered including my lost shipping expenses.
This doesn't happen too often, but believe me, saying "I am not responsible for items shipped uninsured" in your TOS is useless!
posted on June 13, 2002 11:57:52 AM
Excellent idea.
I think that postal insurance is a waist anyway except for high dollar items.
believe me, saying "I am not responsible for items shipped uninsured" in your TOS is useless!
We had that statement in our auctions when we first started selling but quickly did away with it. We now just say insurance is extra. Believe it or not some buyers insist on having the package insured. That's up to them.
posted on June 13, 2002 12:14:15 PM
I sell some items for a friend who was a glass/pottery collector. Those items I always say in my TOS buyer to pay $X.XX including insurance. But I sell videos myself and most go for under $10.00 it's amazing the number of people who will insure an item $5.00 or under. I mail about 20 packages a day, and there are always 2 or 3 that have insurance on them.
posted on June 13, 2002 12:14:40 PM
I understand both of the comments, however I am still holding out to letting the option to the buyer, with tos disclaimer about my responsibility. It's not written in stone, so it may change later to that insurance is extra, as previously mentioned.
I still get buyers wanting non-priority shipment (after auction closes) even though I state the shipment agreement between the buyer and myself, is priority.
posted on June 13, 2002 12:59:29 PM
I agree with the $.50 handling fee for self insuring low end items. On any item over $25.00, I have the statement of priority shipping amount plus insurance based on final bid amount. I do not leave that up to the buyer. The insurance amount is added into the final invoice and I do not ship until it is paid.
For heavier items I almost always ship UPS, where insurance up to $100 is free.
The only package of mine that has ever truly gotten lost was a present for a friend. I mailed it across town last July and it still hasn't arrived. Thanks alot USPS.
posted on June 13, 2002 01:09:03 PM
Oh goody, another insurance thread.
Yes, saying "seller not responsible for uninsured mailing" (or whatever) in TOS is worthless. Paypal, for one, couldn't care less about that.
Yes, setting aside 50 cents from every sale for self insurance will put you way ahead. It's a smart idea.
posted on June 13, 2002 01:39:20 PM
According to the law.....
Unless other agrrements are made, a product shipped is, by default, Free on Board. Meaning, once the seller turns it over to the shipper, it becomes a problem between the shipper and the customer.
That is the law, but it does not garner much repeat business among the "general populace". Retailers and wholesalers understand this law. Individual customers still think they are the most important person God put on this earth.
There are only 10 types of people in the world
Those who understand binary and those who don't
[ edited by mlecher on Jun 13, 2002 01:39 PM ]
posted on June 13, 2002 01:58:44 PM
(We had that statement in our auctions when we first started selling but quickly did away with it. We now just say insurance is extra. Believe it or not some buyers insist on having the package insured. That's up to them.)
Full agreement have done this for over a year. If buyer is unhappy full refund upon returns. No matter who is "right" Not worth the effort. Could list five lots in the time it took to fight over a bad sale. However on big lots that I cannot afford to "eat" if lost I insure even if buyer did not pay for insurance. A low profile on this issue usually works with most buyers. 5% nothing works no matter what I do.
posted on June 13, 2002 03:01:09 PM
Well, since I started the thread you referenced, I'll respond.
I never once stated that I was entitled to this item no matter what. All I want is some sort of proof that the item was shipped. It *is* the responsibility of the seller to ship the item, right? They can a) get free delivery confirmation for priority (my package was mailed that way), or b) get a free handy dandy receipt from the post office that shows the weight of the item and the zip codes. Neither of which costs the seller anything extra.
If the seller can't show proof the item was shipped, just how do I know they didn't decide to take advantage of the fact that I declined insurance and decided to just pocket the money and keep the item and claim it was lost? This is a fairly new seller, and they sold lots of items in a short amount of time, and has gotten very little feedback on those items. Makes me wonder if there are more people waiting for shipments from this seller that never shipped.
posted on June 13, 2002 04:53:01 PM .50 extra for handling and act as self-insuring is a much better approach than USPS insurance, to the advantage of both buyer and seller.
posted on June 13, 2002 05:38:10 PM
On items that I pay a low price for and I put a BIN on I never ask for insurance. If the item never arrives I reimburse. But I do on items I want insurance on I always include the price of the insurance in my final Shipping price. i.e. S/H is $2.50 insurance included. I never let a buyer out of insurance if the item is expensive or breakable. If I can help it I do not add a handling charge. Most of my mailing items I get free.
posted on June 13, 2002 06:50:48 PM
If the seller had to pay for the insurance it wouldn't be worth it. Say one package every thousand mysterely never arrived. 1000 packages x $1.10 = $1100.
Lost package plus chargeback = $50.00 (fill in the blank). It's cheaper for the seller not to insure. You could have a lot of lost packages before it would be worth insuring.
Buyers should pay for insurance because it's a cost involved in the sale, and costs are passed onto the buyer anyway you want to cut it.
I never once stated that I was entitled to this item no matter what. All I want is some sort of proof that the item was shipped. It *is* the responsibility of the seller to ship the item, right?
I agree with you. Sellers should keep good records. This of necessity includes keeping mailing receipts.
Your thread got a bit off track and turned into a hot button issue.
posted on June 13, 2002 07:30:19 PM
Nonsense. Selling insurance requires compliantce with many laws and regulations may be illegal in many ways, but what is normally refered to as "self-insuring" simply means not purchasing insurance (and cover one's own loses), which is certainly legal. Neither .50 handling charge, nor compensating for lost or damaged goods are against any law.
posted on June 13, 2002 08:05:02 PM
Because almost everything I ship is fragile, my TOS states that everything will be shipped Priority Mail Insured., I don't give the seller a choice. Once that pkg. is in the mail, it is out of my hands & I will not take responsibility for it. The FOB rule is exactly why I do this. "The seller is not responsible once the item leaves his possession.
[ edited by sanmar on Jun 13, 2002 08:06 PM ]
posted on June 14, 2002 05:42:43 AM
This has been discussed at length right here on this board too many times already. Call it what you will, it is against the law to self-insure.
posted on June 14, 2002 08:11:50 AM
dthmj--Sorry, but I can't offer proof of shipping. Why? Because my post office is a bunch of lazy people who take one look at my packages, put in $3.50 x 40 or 50 or however many I bring in and stick them on.
No way are they going to sit there and ring each one up with zip codes in it. That's true even if they are NOT busy! And, if it's small items where they can just give me stamps, they won't even run them through the meters! As far as free priority confirmation goes, that would take hours to print and waste ink by putting each label through my printer.
Much easier to just add $.50 to each sale, call it handling fees, and use it to handle problems.
BananaSpider: I do not call it self-insuring, I do not call it insurance. I call it handling fees and I do not guarantee delivery. But, when the buyer writes saying it is not there, and the proper time has passed, I use my "handling" fees to pay out if needed.
Of course, anything over $50 gets insurance purchased by me.
posted on June 14, 2002 08:29:47 AM
SOON IT WILL BE 3.85 PLUS 1.30 INSURANCE FOR ANY ITEM YOU SHIP VIA USPS PRIORITY INSURED UP TO 50 DOLLARS.total =5.15 ,NOT CHEAP!!
if you provide a brown box insured and shipped first class ,then it is cheaper.
the difference between usps priority and first class can be just 1-2 days/
of course there is extra work and cost in getting those brown boxes.
posted on June 14, 2002 09:35:38 AM Yes, saying "seller not responsible for uninsured mailing" (or whatever) in TOS is worthless. Paypal, for one, couldn't care less about that."
pelorus years ago, I started as a buyer and continue to be buyer on top of being a seller. I have had my fair share of "bad" transactions, so I know what it's like from the buyer's POV.
I don't accept paypal. Not only that, I would leave you a neg and put you on my block list so you wouldn't be able to bid on my auctions again.
posted on June 14, 2002 11:48:59 AM "it is against the law to self-insure."
Ridiculous nonsense, do you expect us to believe that it is illegal to sent a package without insurance?
I doubt that "to self-insure" even has any legal meaning.
posted on June 14, 2002 12:32:21 PM
"Unless other agrrements are made, a product shipped is, by default, Free on Board. Meaning, once the seller turns it over to the shipper, it becomes a problem between the shipper and the customer."
This is incorrect. FOB is a term that only applies to boats and vessels on waterways and seas. It does not apply to airplanes, semi's and trains which your packages are sent. Alos, I don't believe it is by default, it should be spelled out in your contract with the buyer.
I would think self insurance laws would vary by state.
posted on June 14, 2002 12:57:46 PM
Charging your customers for insurance and not providing it, is called self-insuring.
You can not collect insurance funds without any intention of purchasing coverage. You can not sell insurance or act as an insurance company without a license. You can not charge x.xx for insurance and not reputablly insure. That's all there is to it. I could go on and on but you don't seem to want to hear the truth about this.
You should not overcharge 100 customers .50 handling each just to compensate for one stray or damaged package. Although this type of handling fee is not illegal, it is certainly unethical. If it is necessary for you to conduct business this way, then I feel sorry for you.
[ edited by BananaSpider on Jun 14, 2002 01:03 PM ]
posted on June 14, 2002 01:41:59 PM
"You can not collect insurance funds without any intention of purchasing coverage. You can not sell insurance or act as an insurance company without a license."
Don't just assume that is true. Most states do allow companies to self insure their own employees Health coverage, which means there may be a loophole where it applies to self insuring your customers packages.
posted on June 14, 2002 01:55:04 PM
Bananaspider says: "You should not overcharge 100 customers .50 handling each just to compensate for one stray or damaged package. Although this type of handling fee is not illegal, it is certainly unethical. If it is necessary for you to conduct business this way, then I feel sorry for you."
I am not overcharging them if I state the fee for handling in the auction. Nobody is putting a gun to a bidder's head forcing him to bid. It's open and honest, not unethical.
posted on June 14, 2002 02:18:13 PM
It is called "handling" which covers a large multitude of expenses from tape, labels, my time spent etc. to refunds when necessary.
BananaSpider says: "You should not overcharge 100 customers .50 handling each just to compensate for one stray or damaged package. Although this type of handling fee is not illegal, it is certainly unethical. If it is necessary for you to conduct business this way, then I feel sorry for you."
It is not unethical and is not unnusual. If you don't understand that then you don't understand basic business practice.
And I certainly don't need your pity! Save it for someone who does! Shipping and handling fees are clearly stated in all my auctions and I have yet to have a person question it -- that is since I started calling it S&H. Before that I had some wanting their quarter back if it was less cost than the postage label showed. Of course, I NEVER had anyone offer to send me more money if the package wound up weighing more than I thought and I lost $1.00 or more.
Now there are no misunderstandings and everyone is happy -- if you don't like it then I would certainly expect you to just click back out and buy elsewhere.
I have been overcharged on shipping soooo much on Ebay (and I don't mean $.50, I mean $5.00 and more!) that I never bid on anything unless the shipping is clearly stated in the ad -- exact amount. That will be more difficult now that the post office is complicating it all, but I will still stick to that premise when buying. If they state $5.00 shipping and I know it will only cost $1.50 then that is still oK if I want it bad enough. I just don't like unpleasant surprises!
posted on June 14, 2002 02:55:12 PM
"Charging your customers for insurance and not providing it, is called self-insuring."
Don't think so, I think that is called fraud.
"You can not collect insurance funds without any intention of purchasing coverage. You can not sell insurance or act as an insurance company without a license. You can not charge x.xx for insurance and not reputablly insure. That's all there is to it. I could go on and on but you don't seem to want to hear the truth about this."
I think that is correct.
"You should not overcharge 100 customers .50 handling each just to compensate for one stray or damaged package. Although this type of handling fee is not illegal, it is certainly unethical. If it is necessary for you to conduct business this way, then I feel sorry for you."
This is neither illegal nor unethical, and constitutes a much better business practice than requiring your customers to purchase ridiculously expensive USPS insurance.
