Proper action for a stolen package from a Buy/Sell/Trade transaction

[hammertime]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If I sell you a card and it doesn't get there, I am going to refund you even if you technically bore the risk of loss under the UCC or whatever set of rules, because it's the right thing to do. Sometimes being ethical requires going beyond the law.

Sure but when do you throw in the towel on it "not getting there"? That's not so cut and dry. I think it's important people try to see things from the perspective of the other side. A very simple task but by no means easy. The buyer assumes the card was stolen because he was told it was most likely stolen, so to him the situation is over and he's due a refund. Additionally he's probably anxious about having paid via f&f, and not getting a response from the seller only ratchets up that anxiety. The seller probably sees the USPS dealing with historic delays that they're just now beginning to unwind and assumes it could still be delivered. Both of these viewpoints are reasonable.

As others have stated, communication is key. If I were the seller in a situation like this is like to think I'd refund the buyer with the agreement that the payment will be re-sent if the item ever shows up.

[Tyruscobb]

This thread’s pro-buyer crowd is placing sellers in an untenable position. A seller has no protection and is always at a buyer’s pure mercy/honesty. The issue boils down to proof. Let’s walk it through.

What proof do we have that a seller has ever shipped a card? Well, there is a tracking number. This is hard evidence that the seller upheld his end. Absent hacking, there is no way for a seller to fake a tracking number that then shows up in the third-party carrier’s computer/tracking system. The seller providing a tracking number does not rely on his word, mercy, or honesty. This is objective evidence that the seller did what he said he would do.

What proof do we have that a buyer never receives a card? Checking the tracking number is a good start. However, we have all read stories on this site and others' where buyers have claimed that they never received an item despite the third-party carrier’s system showing that it delivered the item.

Is this possible? Sure - computer glitches occur, and sometimes thieves raid mailboxes and porches. Let’s use this scenario – one where the carrier’s system shows it delivered the item, but the buyer swears he never received it?

Under this scenario, the seller has absolute proof that he shipped the card. He has a tracking number that he provided the buyer two weeks earlier. Moreover, the tracking number shows the card went from the seller’s location to the buyer’s location. This is nice evidence. The seller also has evidence that the carrier delivered the card. The carrier’s tracking number shows it allegedly delivered it.

Now, what proof does the buyer have that he never received the card? His own word - That is it. So, despite all the seller’s objective evidence, the seller is now at the buyer’s pure mercy that he is telling the truth. Sellers have to provide evidence – i.e. shipping receipts, tracking numbers, etc. Buyers do not – we simply have to just take their word?

This is a ridiculous position to place sellers in, and exactly why most states have passed laws determining that the the risk of loss passes from the seller to the buyer once he has placed the item into the third-party carrier’s hands, paid for the shipping expense, and emailed the buyer all the details – carrier identity, tracking number, estimated delivery date, etc. This rule is easy and makes sense.

To the insurance table beating crowd – under my hypothetical scenario, do you think the seller has any chance of collecting the insurance proceeds? Good luck. The third-party carrier will say our system shows we delivered the item. So, under my scenario, buying insurance will do nothing, and the seller wasted his money. You might as well use it as toilet paper. How does a seller protect himself, even if he has insurance, if the carrier’s system shows it delivered the item?

I have a hard time placing a higher standard on a private seller than a private buyer. This isn’t a small buyer dealing with a large, sophisticated, international, multi-billion dollar box store seller, who has the financial means to take the hit and wants to always keep the customer happy; this is private citizen John Doe seller dealing with private citizen James Doe buyer.

As I said before, this thread’s pro-buyer crowd has become accustomed to the policies and rules that large companies and financial institutes implement to protect the buyer. These rules are not laws, and do not apply to private individuals entering into private contracts. These companies have every incentive to protect buyers – they want future business. The customer is always right to them. This is why they have adopted rules that are oftentimes contrary to the actual laws that govern contracts and shipping.

Parties are free to negotiate a deal's terms. if a buyer wants protection then demand and negotiate it during the deal. Just know that the seller is probably not going to internalize this protection's added expense and may increase the deal's total price. Not using these protections benefits both parties. It allows the seller to not provide a refund if the buyer claims the card was never delivered. On the flip side, it allows the buyer to purchase a card for a cheaper price. Again, seller's don't simply internalize the added protection's cost, they pass it along to the seller and adjust the card's final price.

So, what is a nice compromise for a collegial collecting community? I say the two parties split the loss – King Solomon wisdom.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

This thread’s pro-buyer crowd is placing sellers in an untenable position. A seller has no protection and is always at a buyer’s pure mercy/honesty. The issue boils down to proof. Let’s walk it through.

What proof do we have that a seller has ever shipped a card? Well, there is a tracking number. This is hard evidence that the seller upheld his end. Absent hacking, there is no way for a seller to fake a tracking number that then shows up in the third-party carrier’s computer/tracking system. The buyer providing a tracking number does not rely on his word, mercy, or honesty. This is objective evidence that the seller did what he said he would do.

What proof do we have that a seller never receives a card? Checking the tracking number is a good start. However, we have all read stories on this site where individuals have claimed that they never received an item despite the third-party carrier’s system showing that it delivered the item.

Is this possible? Sure - computer glitches occur, and sometimes thieves raid mailboxes and porches. Let’s use this scenario – one where the carrier’s system shows it delivered the item, but the seller swears he never received it?

Under this scenario, the seller has absolute proof that he shipped the card. He has a tracking number that he provided the buyer two weeks earlier. Moreover, the tracking number shows the card went from the seller’s location to the buyer’s location. This is nice evidence. The seller also has evidence that the carrier delivered the card. The carrier’s tracking number shows it delivered it.

Now, what proof does the buyer have that he never received the card? His own word - That is it. So, despite all the seller’s objective evidence, the seller is now at the buyer’s pure mercy that he is telling the truth. Sellers have to provide evidence – i.e. shipping receipts, tracking numbers, etc. Buyers do not – we simply have to just take their word?

This is a ridiculous position to place someone in, and exactly why most states have passed laws determining that the the risk of loss passes from the seller to the buyer once he has placed the item into the third-party carrier’s hands, paid for the shipping expense, and emailed the buyer all the details – carrier identity, tracking number, estimated delivery date, etc. This is the rule makes sense.

To the insurance table beating crowd – under my hypothetical scenario, do you think this seller has any chance of collecting the insurance proceeds? Good luck. The third-party carrier will say our system shows we delivered the item. So, under my scenario, buying insurance did nothing, and the seller wasted his money. You might as well use it as toilet paper. How does a seller protect himself, even if he has insurance, if the carrier’s system shows it delivered the item?

I have a hard time placing a higher standard on the seller than the buyer. This isn’t a small buyer dealing with a large box store seller, who has the financial means to take the hit and wants to always keep the customer happy; this is private John Doe seller dealing with private James Doe buyer.

As I said before, this thread’s pro-buyer crowd has become accustomed to the policies and rules that large companies and financial institutes implement to protect the buyer. These rules are not laws, and do not apply to private individuals entering into private contracts. These companies have every incentive to protect buyers – they want future business. The customer is always right to them. This is why they have adopted rules that are oftentimes contrary to the actual laws that govern contracts and shipping.

So, what is a nice compromise for a collegial collecting community? I say the two parties split the loss – King Solomon wisdom.

Good points and very reasonable. Had the facts played out this way I'd be with you: if the USPS shows an item I sold as delivered any problem after that is a "you" problem not a "me" problem. As I understand the fact pattern, though, the item never reached the buyer: it got swallowed up in the postal black hole. Happens sometimes. I've had a few packages go down the rabbit hole myself. So what to do when neither side is at fault? Well, had they not agreed to cheat the devil by using PPFF, the answer is clear: the buyer gets a refund and the seller is left to whatever insurance (private or USPS) that he has to cover these situations. Since they made the bargain they made, however, they have to allocate the loss somehow, and as between the two of them it is a coin-toss under the circumstances.

[bobbyw8469]

I am just now getting to this and looking at the tracking. Yea, that one is pretty bad. Over a month with no update. To the OP....have you ran a trace on the package yet?? There is a Consumer Affairs number you can call with the Post Office......I would get the ball rolling with that.

[mrmopar]

This comment is not meant to describe or imply anything similar with the transaction in question that started this thread, but I simply wanted to toss this out there in response to your post.

I was scanning a lot of the posts in this thread, so this may have been discussed somewhere along the way and I just missed it. If not though, here is one way that a seller could scam a buyer, but still provide tracking.

The tracking number is provided once you buy the label, at least with the Ebay/USPS system. Clearly the seller has purchased postage in which to send the package. That number is now recorded and trackable.

The package enters the system and we watch it move from A to B. Finally, it arrives, and is scanned in as delivered. The seller has now fully delivered on their end of the deal.

The buyer opens the package, and to help drive my point home, even notices that there seems to be no alteration of the package. It is sealed, no rips, tears, resealing, tape, etc.

Here is where my biggest fear of seller fraud comes into play. The buyer reaches into the package for their prize and the package is EMPTY! There is now proof of tracking and delivery, but the seller has simply sent an empty envelope. I do not believe the buyer has any recourse at all at this point and it is a matter of his word against that of the seller.

We hate to think of it, both as a buyer or a seller and thankfully it seems to happen infrequently enough, but there are people out there that are just looking to screw others, period.

I will now share the largest scam I was party to, since I started buying collectibles online. Thankfully the number of bad transactions is a tiny blip on the overall count, otherwise I probably would have quit online trading/buying a long time ago.

This was on the Beckett boards, I think. It's been a very long time, maybe 25 years, so the details may be a little hazy. I am obviously still sore about this after all these years, as i am sharing the story once more. A collector was looking for Brett Favre cards. He was offering one of those certified Topps Willie Mays autographs that were pack inserted. I should have seen this coming, but I allowed myself to trust the guy and ignore some red flags.

I don't recall any of the negotiations, but ultimately ended up sending him an appropriate amount of Favre cards equalling the BV of the Mays. Red Flag #1, this guy is willing to trade me a Mays auto for a stack of $2-5 Favre cards that add up to the Mays value! Who does that?

He gets my Favre cards and is happy with them. The Mays card arrives to me, as promised, except it is a regular commemorative reprint, not the hand signed one. The card was his 1954 Topps card. Those have facsimile autographs on them to begin with, but an authentic Topps autographed card would have had a 2nd signature, the facsimile and a real signature too. I let him know it was not the autographed version and he claims that he had no clue, that his local shop even confirmed it was the autographed version, red flag #2. Anyone with eyes and a clue would not have mistaken this card for a signed one.

He continues to communicate with me, claiming he'll make it right. In the end, I agree to some vintage FB star cards equal to the value of the Favres, red flag #3 similar to the first flag, who trades vintage star cards for common new inserts?

Needless to say, I never got anymore cards from him. Eventually he just stoped responding, after giving me excuse after excuse as to why he had not sent anything to me yet. Did I mention, he claimed to be in a wheelchair at some point after the trade was made. Perhaps that was true, but it just seemed a little too convenient for the scenario. I traded about $150 worth of Favre inserts for a $4 reprint card. Not the end of the world and glad i can call this my worst, especially at today's values. I'd still take the hit, but the gap in value would have shrunk considerably bewteen the late 90s and now.

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

This thread’s pro-buyer crowd is placing sellers in an untenable position. A seller has no protection and is always at a buyer’s pure mercy/honesty. The issue boils down to proof. Let’s walk it through.

What proof do we have that a seller has ever shipped a card? Well, there is a tracking number. This is hard evidence that the seller upheld his end. Absent hacking, there is no way for a seller to fake a tracking number that then shows up in the third-party carrier’s computer/tracking system. The seller providing a tracking number does not rely on his word, mercy, or honesty. This is objective evidence that the seller did what he said he would do.

What proof do we have that a buyer never receives a card? Checking the tracking number is a good start. However, we have all read stories on this site and others' where buyers have claimed that they never received an item despite the third-party carrier’s system showing that it delivered the item.

Is this possible? Sure - computer glitches occur, and sometimes thieves raid mailboxes and porches. Let’s use this scenario – one where the carrier’s system shows it delivered the item, but the buyer swears he never received it?

Under this scenario, the seller has absolute proof that he shipped the card. He has a tracking number that he provided the buyer two weeks earlier. Moreover, the tracking number shows the card went from the seller’s location to the buyer’s location. This is nice evidence. The seller also has evidence that the carrier delivered the card. The carrier’s tracking number shows it allegedly delivered it.

Now, what proof does the buyer have that he never received the card? His own word - That is it. So, despite all the seller’s objective evidence, the seller is now at the buyer’s pure mercy that he is telling the truth. Sellers have to provide evidence – i.e. shipping receipts, tracking numbers, etc. Buyers do not – we simply have to just take their word?

This is a ridiculous position to place sellers in, and exactly why most states have passed laws determining that the the risk of loss passes from the seller to the buyer once he has placed the item into the third-party carrier’s hands, paid for the shipping expense, and emailed the buyer all the details – carrier identity, tracking number, estimated delivery date, etc. This rule is easy and makes sense.

To the insurance table beating crowd – under my hypothetical scenario, do you think the seller has any chance of collecting the insurance proceeds? Good luck. The third-party carrier will say our system shows we delivered the item. So, under my scenario, buying insurance will do nothing, and the seller wasted his money. You might as well use it as toilet paper. How does a seller protect himself, even if he has insurance, if the carrier’s system shows it delivered the item?

I have a hard time placing a higher standard on a private seller than a private buyer. This isn’t a small buyer dealing with a large, sophisticated, international, multi-billion dollar box store seller, who has the financial means to take the hit and wants to always keep the customer happy; this is private citizen John Doe seller dealing with private citizen James Doe buyer.

As I said before, this thread’s pro-buyer crowd has become accustomed to the policies and rules that large companies and financial institutes implement to protect the buyer. These rules are not laws, and do not apply to private individuals entering into private contracts. These companies have every incentive to protect buyers – they want future business. The customer is always right to them. This is why they have adopted rules that are oftentimes contrary to the actual laws that govern contracts and shipping.

Parties are free to negotiate a deal's terms. if a buyer wants protection then demand and negotiate it during the deal. Just know that the seller is probably not going to internalize this protection's added expense and may increase the deal's total price. Not using these protections benefits both parties. It allows the seller to not provide a refund if the buyer claims the card was never delivered. On the flip side, it allows the buyer to purchase a card for a cheaper price. Again, seller's don't simply internalize the added protection's cost, they pass it along to the seller and adjust the card's final price.

So, what is a nice compromise for a collegial collecting community? I say the two parties split the loss – King Solomon wisdom.

[icurnmedic]

Originally Posted by mrmopar

The package enters the system and we watch it move from A to B. Finally, it arrives, and is scanned in as delivered. The seller has now fully delivered on their end of the deal.

The buyer opens the package, and to help drive my point home, even notices that there seems to be no alteration of the package. It is sealed, no rips, tears, resealing, tape, etc.

Here is where my biggest fear of seller fraud comes into play. The buyer reaches into the package for their prize and the package is EMPTY! There is now proof of tracking and delivery, but the seller has simply sent an empty envelope. I do not believe the buyer has any recourse at all at this point and it is a matter of his word against that of the now.

Not a new trick. Happened to me almost 15 years ago on an eBay purchase of a Gretzky rc. Before eBay was pro buyer. I can’t stand a thief!