Non-delivery/severe delay on a BST transaction

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

The buyer paid for a card to be delivered, not shipped. It was not delivered.

I have not seen the parties’ emails containing the valid contract - the offer, acceptance, and consideration. However, I highly doubt the contract specified who bore the shipping risk. I’m assuming the invitation for an offer stated something to the effect, ‘card ABC, $100 net to me, shipped.’ This is what we almost always see on this board. Note the key word - shipped; not delivered.

The buyer then probably responded to the invitation and offered to purchase under those terms. He probably replied, ‘I’ll take it.’ The seller then accepted this offer and consideration was exchanged.

Again, the invitation to offer, which the buyer likely responded to, more than likely stated “shipped.” The seller then bore the cards’ risk from the moment immediately after the sale through the time he paid the postage and handed possession to the third-party carrier. At that time, the risk transferred to the buyer.

I’ll stand by my position.

[nolemmings]

This thread does serve a purpose for me, however. I will go on record here and state that I will not enter any transaction with this or any seller who takes the position that I as buyer bear the risk of loss on a package sent by certified mail, unless:
1) I expressly and affirmatively agree to accept that risk; and
2) the package is properly addressed and packaged.

Insurance just isn't that much for seller to factor into his price, and combined with signature confirmation makes certified mail unnecessary. For higher dollar items, I use registered mail.

[BeanTown]

Did the seller offer insurance? Did the seller say this is the priced "delivered" or "shipped" price? Im not sure why the seller would question some different address only after the package got mailed, its moot. The seller having the buyer pay him as Friends and Family put all the risk on the buyer (from Paypal perspective).

Was insurance even used on this deal as I thought priority mail offered like a maximum of 50.00. Im not sure what the dollar amount is, but there should be some accountability.

I have never been apart of a trade or sale where no insurance was involved. I think it's the responsibility on the seller to get the item there and if it gets lost, then the seller gets paid from the insurance claim (which then gets refunded back to the buyer).

Both parties are board members here so hopefully it gets resolved and lesson learned.

[oldjudge]

I agree with Tyrus that most people are very sloppy with their language when entering into a transaction. Insurance should always be discussed. Taking things a step further, people should think about how things are insured when they deal with auction houses. When you ship a consignment to an auction house is the auction house insuring the items? What is the value the items are insured for? Is this aggregate value broken down for each item? If you sent ten items to Auction A and it is agreed that they will be insured for say $50,000, and it turns out that one of the items is lost, what portion of that $50,000 is assigned to that lost item? Who determines that? If you ship a set of cards to an auction house and a few of the cards in the set are lost, how do you value them? Are you relying on the auction house’s insurance company to determine value, or are you relying on the auction house, or have you predetermined value? Most people don’t think these issues through and are upset when something happens and the results are not what they would like them to be.

[robertsmithnocure]

I have always assumed that it is the buyer’s responsibility to get the payment to the seller and the seller’s responsibility to get the product to the buyer, unless other provisions are agreed upon.

Might make for a good poll.

[oldjudge]

Rob-What you assume makes no difference because the other party may be assuming something else. Why not just discuss it at the time the deal is being negotiated?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Rob-What you assume makes no difference because the other party may be assuming something else. Why not just discuss it at the time the deal is being negotiated?

In all of my transactions, selling and buying, over the past 40 odd years, I have never had such a discussion. I have always operated as the previous poster says, that the seller and buyer need to each complete their end of the deal (get the product/payment safely to the other person.)

[birdman42]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

I have not seen the parties’ emails containing the valid contract - the offer, acceptance, and consideration. However, I highly doubt the contract specified who bore the shipping risk. I’m assuming the invitation for an offer stated something to the effect, ‘card ABC, $100 net to me, shipped.’ This is what we almost always see on this board. Note the key word - shipped; not delivered.

The buyer then probably responded to the invitation and offered to purchase under those terms. He probably replied, ‘I’ll take it.’ The seller then accepted this offer and consideration was exchanged.

Again, the invitation to offer, which the buyer likely responded to, more than likely stated “shipped.” The seller then bore the cards’ risk from the moment immediately after the sale through the time he paid the postage and handed possession to the third-party carrier. At that time, the risk transferred to the buyer.

I’ll stand by my position.

How nice for you. If you'll take a moment to reread, you'll see that the OP didn't ask for a legal opinion, he asked about what course to take. In my experience, people who replace a moral compass with legal chapter and verse are people I'd rather stay away from.

I don't buy many cards these days, but when I do it certainly won't be from you.