Non-delivery/severe delay on a BST transaction

Tyruscobb · #1 02-12-2020, 05:55 PM

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 · #2 02-12-2020, 06:19 PM

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 · #3 02-12-2020, 08:12 PM

Quote:

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 · #4 02-13-2020, 01:22 AM

Quote:

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 · #5 02-13-2020, 05:34 AM

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 · #6 02-13-2020, 01:35 PM

Quote:

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 · #7 02-13-2020, 02:53 PM

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 · #8 02-13-2020, 05:28 PM

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 · #9 02-13-2020, 07:56 PM

Quote:

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 · #10 02-18-2020, 10:19 PM

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

1952boyntoncollector · #11 02-20-2020, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

funny that it involves these cards!

I made an offer on those Foxx's wondering who you sold those too....guess i know now..

if you happen to get them back Id still be interested in one or more of them and i never had a problem with the mail.

kevinlenane · #12 02-23-2020, 07:55 AM

I also have "never had a problem" receiving mail until this transaction - but you can certainly engage the seller of the cards I ordered if they are found. For factual transparency'a sake I received the refund after 11 weeks. I asked for restitution after month 1 and month 2 with a total of 4 requests.

I wanted to add that if you are looking to add some extra life to your business (if you try to make money selling cards/memorabilia) - it would be wise to remember that the true test of customer service is when there is an issue/problem in transactions.

Merely expecting having items delivered on time by a postal carrier is table stakes and NOT a wise customer service strategy. Everyone gets good reviews when an item is delivered on time. I will certainly consider this the next time I select a vendor for purchase.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What Would You Do With This Forum Transaction?	Leon	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	61	11-29-2019 06:14 PM
At Bat, On Deck, In the Hole - RAIN DELAY	CollectingAmericasPastime	T206 cards B/S/T	6	09-07-2017 08:01 AM
Another Interesting Transaction:	clydepepper	Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk	0	12-19-2016 01:55 PM
Delay in USPS Standard Post	oldjudge	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	9	06-09-2015 01:26 PM
Yankees rain delay wooden token??	1966CUDA	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	1	10-01-2009 04:31 PM