Opinion on a feedback to leave

[steve B]

How did the post office accept it like that? Flat rate boxes are supposed to at least close on their own without tape and be folded correctly. I've had one that was refused at the counter because I tape the flap of the flat rate box down. Small flat rate boxes can fit inside a flat rate envelope so it wasn't a problem And a friend of mine puts the label over the flap of the flat rate envelope and had one returned.

So them accepting one where the stuff inside doesn't actually fit is strange.

The attitude that shipping is supposed to cover his selling expenses is just wrong. If he'd justified higher shipping because of using a bigger box or claiming the expense of packing materials plus some handling. I might buy that, but not the way he shipped it.

I'm not sure what I'd do for feedback. I've basically abandoned feedback except for sellers who ask or go well beyond normal expectations. Or sometimes for a newish seller who asks.

Steve b

[sycks22]

The confusing thing about 3rd party insurance with auction houses is how the same invoice price will cost $15 to ship and $65 with the other. Both are sent 2 day. Best of luck in the decision as it's a tough one.

[drmondobueno]

There is no excuse for poor business practice. Hit the negtive box, make your comments and be done with it and him.

Keith

[npa589]

As I discovered, the way you """fit them""" is by putting them on a 90 degree angle to the long side of a SFRB. Then you wrap it in tape and put the label over the tape, and then wrap it in tape again. I wish I could say "heavily wrapped", but I can't.

Dave: "There are lots of shipping Insurance options out there now that don't reflect on the label that can factor into the shipping cost. It can cost $15+ bucks to Insure $1500. ShipInsure through Stamps.com or Ebay can sometimes cost more then the Post Office rate."

I definitely agree, and what you say is true, in that it is only reflected on the label if you purchase USPS insurance. I've only used eBay's insurance a couple times because it was less than the PO rate. That was about 6 months or so ago though, because now, the eBay rate is higher than PO rate. Usually, for him to actually be covered under the insurance option he chose, it would have required a signature for it to actually be covered, not to mention the fact that he didn't package the way his insurance company requires.

I only included a link before but didn't explain everything. The rate he claimed was 1$ per 100$. The company he mentioned actually offers $.24 per 100$ for USPS Priority. Then, there is a $1.50 fee for each shipment. Under that option, it would have cost $4.74 to cover it. He claimed 15$.

https://www.shipandinsure.com/rates.aspx

He also did not adhere to many of the requirements for Ship & Insure, and would have been denied coverage.
https://www.shipandinsure.com/shippi...tructions.aspx

I personally don't think he had it insured at all, and am almost positive he was blatantly lying about insuring it at all, let alone the actual cost to him.

[npa589]

Obviously the frustration is not over the amount of money here, it's more about the lack of principle, and the continued lack of honesty when pressed.

I think we all get kind of frustrated when we purchase from an auction house, and buy 1 200$ item, yet our shipping & handling is 15$. It's "What, do you think I'm an idiot???"

That's why we have heralded some recent auction house upstarts, such as JVSC, who charge the ACTUAL shipping cost, maybe even less. But, we would expect no less, because most of us have done business with Joe, and he is as good and honest as it gets. I suppose you could say he always respects every buyer in his invoices.

[Leon]

The total shipping cost isn't what I would have the issue with either. It's the packaging and everything else.

[ValKehl]

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but it is my understanding that eBay policy places the burden of loss or damage intransit on the SELLER. Hence, I feel a seller is well within his "rights" to charge a reasonable shipping charge which would include insurance, even if the seller doesn't obtain any insurance on the shipment. In such instances, the seller is, in effect, self-insuring the shipment, and I don't feel there is anything wrong with a seller charging a reasonable amount for the self-insurance he is providing.
Val

[HercDriver]

I would definitely leave negative feedback. I'm not sure why everybody is so tentative about doing it, but if the guy sucks, let everyone else know. It's not the end of the world for the seller, but it might make a new buyer ask questions before bidding. If it was a negative experience, let the feedback reflect it.

Geno

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

I'm assuming that these were BIN's. If that was the case he should have factored his labor and private insurance into the cost of his merchandise and reflect that is his price, not his shipping. I would neutral feedback and ding every one of his stars while making a clear point in the text about his horrible packing.

The thing to remember is that not everybody does things the way that you do, and it's not always practical to just roll the shipping/handling cost into the item price. In my case, I handle a lot of items on consignment, and I use eBay to maintain a certain amount of transparency when selling other people's stuff for them. A consignor can look at my eBay store and see their items when they are listed. They can also see when something sells, at what price it sells for, and can figure how much they've got coming to them based on taking a percentage of that final sale price they see. If I were to start trying to itemize how much of the sale price they see went to shipping costs, it would be a never-ending headache, especially when a single order included items from several different consignors. Rather than try to parse out what percentage of the shipping cost should be attributed to Consignor A's item, and figure okay Consignor B's item weighs more, so more of the shipping cost should come out of his, etc., I just charge shipping separately. I also usually show several shipping options for each item, and have a list of combined shipping rates for most typical items that I sell. When you take into account shipping, packing, and collecting supplies along with postage and the percentage that eBay charges on shipping now, it's just about break-even for me, but the s/h charge is ALWAYS more than the raw postage cost. Would it be easier for the buyer if all the Fixed Price items showed $0.00 for shipping but with a higher per-item cost? Sure. But I'm not going to make my life a hell of paperwork and lengthy explanations to every consignor just because a buyer can't figure out to subtract the shipping cost from their offer price when deciding whether to purchase or not.

Originally Posted by ValKehl

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but it is my understanding that eBay policy places the burden of loss or damage intransit on the SELLER. Hence, I feel a seller is well within his "rights" to charge a reasonable shipping charge which would include insurance, even if the seller doesn't obtain any insurance on the shipment. In such instances, the seller is, in effect, self-insuring the shipment, and I don't feel there is anything wrong with a seller charging a reasonable amount for the self-insurance he is providing.
Val

You are correct that eBay basically forces all sellers to provide "insurance" on every item they sell in the sense that any buyer can force a return on any item, whether the seller specifies "no returns" or not. Some sellers choose to pass that insurance responsibility off to the USPS or UPS or Fed-Ex, for a price, and others choose to, as you say, "self insure." Many more sellers don't realize or charge for the burden being placed on them and just "hope nothing happens." When eBay first began disallowing an itemized charge for insurance, they sent e-mails to sellers telling them that they should just roll the insurance cost into the shipping price, which is basically what is being done here. Over time, many buyers have come to take "insurance" for granted and now expect sellers to shoulder the responsibility without any additional compensation.

Originally Posted by HercDriver

I would definitely leave negative feedback. I'm not sure why everybody is so tentative about doing it, but if the guy sucks, let everyone else know. It's not the end of the world for the seller, but it might make a new buyer ask questions before bidding. If it was a negative experience, let the feedback reflect it.

Geno

I agree with this statement too, but only after communication with the seller. Too often (as in, every time) the negative and neutral feedback I have received as a seller has been left by a buyer who never contacted me about any issue, and 9 times out of 10 they could have been easily corrected with a little communication. It is VERY frustrating for a seller to be ambushed with negative feedback over something they could have corrected or made amends for if they had just known about the issue. Slapping down a negative without first communicating with the seller does nobody any good, and if you're shopping with me, is ALWAYS grounds for being banned from future bidding/buying. In cases like this though, where the seller makes no attempt to make good on the issue or even admit that there is an issue, it's only fair that you let other buyers know about it.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by ValKehl

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but it is my understanding that eBay policy places the burden of loss or damage intransit on the SELLER. Hence, I feel a seller is well within his "rights" to charge a reasonable shipping charge which would include insurance, even if the seller doesn't obtain any insurance on the shipment. In such instances, the seller is, in effect, self-insuring the shipment, and I don't feel there is anything wrong with a seller charging a reasonable amount for the self-insurance he is providing.
Val

True, but they way he packaged the items completely undermines his shipping costs. Had they arrived neat an tidy (and been more cordial) I would guess the OP would have been content. Can't speak for him however.

[travrosty]

the best kind of negative feedback you can leave is to not buy from him again.