Non-delivery/severe delay on a BST transaction

[obcmac]

The rules we play by are very clear to me...if you buy a card, you get the card...or a refund. Any weaseling out of your obligation to deliver one of these two things is disgusting. As as seller I protect myself with insurance and proof of delivery...it is not the buyers job to cover my responsibilities.

Mac

[bobbyw8469]

I'm confused as to the whole address thing as well. Did the buyer give the seller the address to ship the card to, or did the seller just grab the address on his own??

[Leon]

Originally Posted by obcmac

The rules we play by are very clear to me...if you buy a card, you get the card...or a refund. Any weaseling out of your obligation to deliver one of these two things is disgusting. As as seller I protect myself with insurance and proof of delivery...it is not the buyers job to cover my responsibilities.

Mac

Me too. It is very easy. Barring any language to the contrary, both sides have to meet their obligation. If I don't talk about anything concerning the delivery and, as a seller I say "delivered", then it is on me as the seller. Now if I say "plus whatever shipping and/or insurance you want" then the obligation goes back to the buyer to either protect themselves or not. Very clear to me too.

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by Leon

Me too. It is very easy. Barring any language to the contrary, both sides have to meet their obligation. If I don't talk about anything concerning the delivery and, as a seller I say "delivered", then it is on me as the seller. Now if I say "plus whatever shipping and/or insurance you want" then the obligation goes back to the buyer to either protect themselves or not. Very clear to me too.

Leon-Why not take the doubt out of it? Add a statement on the BST that sellers assume risk of loss until the item is delivered to the buyer unless stated otherwise.

[RedsFan1941]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Leon-Why not take the doubt out of it? Add a statement on the BST that sellers assume risk of loss until the item is delivered to the buyer unless stated otherwise.

come on jay. you have been in the hobby longer than 99 percent of the people on this board. it has ALWAYS been that the seller assumes the risk and is responsible for getting the card to the buyer. there are article in hobby papers from the 70s stating this. sometimes you want to argue just to argue

[Brian Van Horn]

Just so everyone is aware, I am not sidestepping my responsibilities in this matter. I have repeatedly been in contact with both the USPS consumer affairs department in Pittsburgh and Long Island, NY. Next week a refund will be issued, unless by some chance the package is found. I don't ask for any sympathy. All I will point out is that for the better number of the last twenty years, I have used certified mail. My estimate is this has totaled over 4,000 transactions. This is the second transaction via certified mail in which the cards have not arrived. The previous resulted in a refund to the buyer. I am just putting this statement out there and do with it what you will.

[obcbobd]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Just so everyone is aware, I am not sidestepping my responsibilities in this matter. I have repeatedly been in contact with both the USPS consumer affairs department in Pittsburgh and Long Island, NY. Next week a refund will be issued, unless by some chance the package is found. I don't ask for any sympathy. All I will point out is that for the better number of the last twenty years, I have used certified mail. My estimate is this has totaled over 4,000 transactions. This is the second transaction via certified mail in which the cards have not arrived. The previous resulted in a refund to the buyer. I am just putting this statement out there and do with it what you will.

Hope you don't take a loss, but but you are doing the right thing. As a past satisfied buyer from you I take notice and continue to have you on my list of "Grade A" sellers

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by obcbobd

Hope you don't take a loss, but but you are doing the right thing. As a past satisfied buyer from you I take notice and continue to have you on my list of "Grade A" sellers

Bob,

Thank you for the kind words.

[wondo]

Originally Posted by obcbobd

Hope you don't take a loss, but but you are doing the right thing. As a past satisfied buyer from you I take notice and continue to have you on my list of "Grade A" sellers

+1

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by RedsFan1941

come on jay. you have been in the hobby longer than 99 percent of the people on this board. it has ALWAYS been that the seller assumes the risk and is responsible for getting the card to the buyer. there are article in hobby papers from the 70s stating this. sometimes you want to argue just to argue

Completely disagree. Every transaction that I have ever been involved in I have brought up insurance. Many sellers offer in as part of the selling price, some do not. I never assume it is included--I check.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Leon-Why not take the doubt out of it? Add a statement on the BST that sellers assume risk of loss until the item is delivered to the buyer unless stated otherwise.

I feel like saying, You manage it and you got a deal .
No way in h. e. double toothpicks will that happen.

we need a card.,...(and graders who can authenticate cards but that is for another thread. )

[Clutch-Hitter]

Originally Posted by Leon

I feel like saying, You manage it and you got a deal .
No way in h. e. double toothpicks will that happen.

we need a card.,...(and graders who can authenticate cards but that is for another thread. )

That's a very nice, authentic Fro Joy, Leon.

[wondo]

Originally Posted by obcmac

The rules we play by are very clear to me...if you buy a card, you get the card...or a refund. Any weaseling out of your obligation to deliver one of these two things is disgusting. As as seller I protect myself with insurance and proof of delivery...it is not the buyers job to cover my responsibilities.

Mac

+1

Totally agree, Mac

As a seller I use signature confirmation, and by default "self-insure". As a buyer I nearly always, but not exclusively, use Paypal G\S. The exception is when I successfully deal with someone multiple times. I need to rethink that practice.

Edited to add: Some posted their interperetation of the contract legalities siding with the seller (and they may be correct under the law). However, there exists a "norm" in the hobby that differs, and is the one under which I believe most of us operate.

[Scott L.]

Originally Posted by obcmac

The rules we play by are very clear to me...if you buy a card, you get the card...or a refund. Any weaseling out of your obligation to deliver one of these two things is disgusting. As as seller I protect myself with insurance and proof of delivery...it is not the buyers job to cover my responsibilities.

Mac

Well put.

[Tyruscobb]

I’m sorry. I just do not understand why people think the seller should bear the entire loss. I’ve thoroughly explained the legal analysis, and how it works in the real world. People either do not know the law or simply do not care. People have grown so accustomed to how EBay and PayPal handle things.

These companies’ policies are just that - their policies. They are not the law and do not control two private individuals entering into a contract, especially if just Friends/Family is used.

Buyers and sellers need to take responsibility for their actions. Do your due diligence. Do not leave anything to chance or assumption. The reason is that one contractual party may assume A, while the other party assumes Z. The parties need to spell out the deal’s entire terms and conditions. It is not hard or difficult.

If two people enter into a contract that includes shipping, the contract is completed when the shipping carrier takes possession. It does not include delivery unless specified. The reason is that the seller, like the buyer, has no control over UPS, FedEx or the Postal Service. The seller is not the one delivering the package.

Yes, the seller may have chosen the Postal Service over UPS, but that decision, absent a negotiated carrier, still does not shift the loss risk onto the seller. These are acceptable carriers.

If a third-party carrier loses the package, it is not the seller’s fault. So, why should he take all the loss? What did he do wrong? The seller is also not at fault. So, the law aside, because both parties are innocent, and because this is a friendly board, I’d say to split the difference. Both parties take a 50% hit. But, those clamoring for the seller to take all the loss, absent certain negotiated terms, such as the required carrier, who bears the loss burden, insurance, etc., are just wrong - in equity and the law.

[egbeachley]

Geez, stop playing lawyer when you aren’t one.

There was no provision in the contract regarding the delivery method or choice of a common carrier. He simply purchased a card and a card was not received.

The seller saved a few bucks avoiding insurance and has probably done so many times before. That’s fine. But this Time the odds were against him and the seller needs to pay back the buyer from the accumulation of prior shipping savings.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

I’m sorry. I just do not understand why people think the seller should bear the entire loss. I’ve thoroughly explained the legal analysis, and how it works in the real world. People either do not know the law or simply do not care. People have grown so accustomed to how EBay and PayPal handle things.

These companies’ policies are just that - their policies. They are not the law and do not control two private individuals entering into a contract, especially if just Friends/Family is used.

Buyers and sellers need to take responsibility for their actions. Do your due diligence. Do not leave anything to chance or assumption. The reason is that one contractual party may assume A, while the other party assumes Z. The parties need to spell out the deal’s entire terms and conditions. It is not hard or difficult.

If two people enter into a contract that includes shipping, the contract is completed when the shipping carrier takes possession. It does not include delivery unless specified. The reason is that the seller, like the buyer, has no control over UPS, FedEx or the Postal Service. The seller is not the one delivering the package.

Yes, the seller may have chosen the Postal Service over UPS, but that decision, absent a negotiated carrier, still does not shift the loss risk onto the seller. These are acceptable carriers.

If a third-party carrier loses the package, it is not the seller’s fault. So, why should he take all the loss? What did he do wrong? The seller is also not at fault. So, the law aside, because both parties are innocent, and because this is a friendly board, I’d say to split the difference. Both parties take a 50% hit. But, those clamoring for the seller to take all the loss, absent certain negotiated terms, such as the required carrier, who bears the loss burden, insurance, etc., are just wrong - in equity and the law.

These aren't EBay and Paypal's policies. These are the policies of every credit card and issuing bank. EBay and PayPal have adopted them, but do make a few exemptions such as having tracking and showing it delivered, but the buyer claims they didn't receive. Their only other option would be to eat a bunch of charge backs.

We have a good thing here with people paying with friends and family to save both parties PayPal fees. If this becomes a thing where sellers are going to expect to get paid for cards that aren't delivered, then that is going away. Sellers will pay with their credit card to be protected from loss. The seller choses the shipper. The seller choses to buy insurance or not. Why should the buyer be penalized for choices the seller makes?

[BeanTown]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

I’m sorry. I just do not understand why people think the seller should bear the entire loss. I’ve thoroughly explained the legal analysis, and how it works in the real world. People either do not know the law or simply do not care. People have grown so accustomed to how EBay and PayPal handle things.

These companies’ policies are just that - their policies. They are not the law and do not control two private individuals entering into a contract, especially if just Friends/Family is used.

Buyers and sellers need to take responsibility for their actions. Do your due diligence. Do not leave anything to chance or assumption. The reason is that one contractual party may assume A, while the other party assumes Z. The parties need to spell out the deal’s entire terms and conditions. It is not hard or difficult.

If two people enter into a contract that includes shipping, the contract is completed when the shipping carrier takes possession. It does not include delivery unless specified. The reason is that the seller, like the buyer, has no control over UPS, FedEx or the Postal Service. The seller is not the one delivering the package.

Yes, the seller may have chosen the Postal Service over UPS, but that decision, absent a negotiated carrier, still does not shift the loss risk onto the seller. These are acceptable carriers.

If a third-party carrier loses the package, it is not the seller’s fault. So, why should he take all the loss? What did he do wrong? The seller is also not at fault. So, the law aside, because both parties are innocent, and because this is a friendly board, I’d say to split the difference. Both parties take a 50% hit. But, those clamoring for the seller to take all the loss, absent certain negotiated terms, such as the required carrier, who bears the loss burden, insurance, etc., are just wrong - in equity and the law.

Whats your name? With 20 posts, I should say welcome to the forum. By chance do you know either party involved in this transaction?

[ibuysportsephemera]

As a seller since 1997 I always accept responsibility until the package shows delivered. However, I have had a few instances where a package shows delivered and the buyer claims that they didn't receive it. That is where I put my foot down and say that my job as a seller is complete and I no longer have liability for the lost package.

Jeff

[Leon]

Originally Posted by BeanTown

Whats your name? With 20 posts, I should say welcome to the forum. By chance do you know either party involved in this transaction?

I don't think this person has crossed the "full-name" line yet for needing a name but they can consider this fair warning that anymore debating is going to need a full name.

[kevinlenane]

The truth i still really want the cards! They were three Jimmie Foxx cards and believe it or not - that what I really wanted out of this The refund will absolutely go to more Jimmie Foxx and likely now an upgrade on my post card exhibit.

[Brian Van Horn]

Just so everyone is clear, the transaction was for three Foxx cards and a 1933 Eddie Morgan card. I have to admit I forgot about the Eddie Morgan card when I was listing the contents with scans for the claim on the USPS website.

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by Leon

I don't think this person has crossed the "full-name" line yet for needing a name but they can consider this fair warning that anymore debating is going to need a full name.

Thanks, Leon. I have visited this site, as a guest, for several years. I officially joined this past summer when EBay started collecting state sales tax. I joined to obtain access to the buy/sell/trade forum (guest viewers cannot access it).

I am always looking for a good card and deal to add to my low-grade vintage collection (not investment). I joined to potentially save money in buying cards (avoiding fees, etc). I have successfully transacted with two members. Everything went smoothly both times.

I do not post a lot, but enjoy reading them and learning. I ventured into this topic, because it involves the law. I do not practice in this specific legal area, but have some experience in it many years ago.

This debate interested me. I do not have a dog in this fight. I do not know either party. I was just providing my humble opinion. I’ll return to the shadows now.

[Brian Van Horn]

Just an update. Kevin has been refunded his money including s/h. If anyone sees the following cards, please let me know.

[obcmac]

I just wanted to add, that I didn't mean to imply that Brian wasn't going to hold up his end of the deal. Maybe it's not the timeline the OP would have liked, but sounds like Brian is making good on his end of the deal. I would absolutely continue to buy items from Brian without reservation...even more if he would ever give me that large discount I keep hoping for.

Mac

Originally Posted by obcmac

The rules we play by are very clear to me...if you buy a card, you get the card...or a refund. Any weaseling out of your obligation to deliver one of these two things is disgusting. As as seller I protect myself with insurance and proof of delivery...it is not the buyers job to cover my responsibilities.

Mac