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

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

It has everything to do with risk of loss. Even though the card may be 3,000 miles away, you become the legal owner as soon as you pay the buyer. You don’t become the owner when you open the package at your house and physically take possession. You become the owner when payment is made.

However, despite your ownership before the card is even shipped, the question becomes when the risk of loss transfers from the seller (the possessor, but no longer owner) to buyer (the current owner, but not possessor).

“225 shipped F/F” means in exchange for $225, the seller will sell you the card and ship it to you. That’s it. There are no implied or other implicit conditions or terms. You can try to read them in all you want. Shipped does not mean delivered.

If the seller accepts PayPal, they must abide by PayPal's terms and that means Goods and Services are protected until the product is delivered, not just shipped.

[Jcfowler6]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Friends and Family was never intended to be used to buy stuff. It was meant for sending money to friends and family.

In this sale the seller asked for F&F and didn't give an option that includes buyer protection. I think some people don't understand paying by F&F means giving up any protection that PayPal offers. This isn't the sellers fault, buyers should educate themselves.

I’ve had that option as a buyer presented to me many times before. To pay with f&f. I will often add 3% and pay via goods and services in those instances. I don’t always do that but when I don’t I know I am taking a risk.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To the extent you are arguing the use of the word "shipped" suggests both parties understood it to be a "shipping contract" with what that implies for who bears the risk of loss, I disagree. Nobody thinks about it in those terms except maybe you LOL. But as to the legal effect of the contract, I agree with you, I was the first to post the relevant UCC provision if memory serves. But my point is that the ultimate question here is ethical, not legal.

You may be right. I’m probably one of the few that thinks about these things. I can’t turn it off. That is what a legal education and career does to you.

Ethically, I think the fair thing to do amongst friends is to split the loss. However, I’m sure this too won’t satisfy some of the folks here. They will want the seller to reimburse the buyer and pay him for his emotional distress.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Jcfowler6

I’ve had that option as a buyer presented to me many times before. To pay with f&f. I will often add 3% and pay via goods and services in those instances. I don’t always do that but when I don’t I know I am taking a risk.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, I always add the 3% and keep my protection. Transactions can always go bad, if the OP used G&S, he'd have his money back.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

You may be right. I’m probably one of the few that thinks about these things. I can’t turn it off. That is what a legal education and career does to you.

Ethically, I think the fair thing to do amongst friends is to split the loss. However, I’m sure this too won’t satisfy some of the folks here. They will want the seller to reimburse the buyer and pay him for his emotional distress.

In my fourth decade practicing and I have long since turned it off … well, sort of lol.

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by Jim65

If the seller accepts PayPal, they must abide by PayPal's terms and that means Goods and Services are protected until the product is delivered, not just shipped.

I understand that. But, the parties apparently negotiated and agreed to opt out of G/S, and agreed on F/F. The buyer lost all his protections at that point.

People are forgetting (or maybe they honestly do not know) that their experiences and transactions with/through large commercial companies, who have certain policies and rules, do not always apply to private individuals entering into a private contract. These large company transactions have created expectations that are not always the law, and do not always apply to private transactions. People, however, are applying these large companies’ rules and their conditioned consumer expectations to other contracts. This is a mistake. You cannot mix apples and oranges.

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In my fourth decade practicing and I have long since turned it off … well, sort of lol.

Sounds like you may have 20 years on me. I got an A+ in my UCC and secured transactions class by the way. Ha.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

Sounds like you may have 20 years on me. I got an A+ in my UCC and secured transactions class by the way. Ha.

And it shows.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Friends and Family was never intended to be used to buy stuff. It was meant for sending money to friends and family.

In this sale the seller asked for F&F and didn't give an option that includes buyer protection. I think some people don't understand paying by F&F means giving up any protection that PayPal offers. This isn't the sellers fault, buyers should educate themselves.

To the bold part. I have sold many items on here and used PP FF as one of several payments options accepted. I have no problem with the buyer then paying with regular PP as long as they pay the fees. I usually list stuff for the absolute cheapest I will sell it for. So it pisses me off when the buyer pays with regular PP and doesn't add the fees. Yes it is usually only a dollar or a few dollars but I still think it is BS.

To the original post, after a month a seller should refund no matter how bad USPS is at the time. If it does show up later the buyer needs to then pay the seller. Just my 2 cents.

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

And it shows.

I’ve enjoyed discussing/debating the law with you Peter. I’m an insurance defense attorney. Maybe if I pick up a few more insurance carriers or third-party administrator clients this coming year, I can afford some of your cards! You are always offering nice items.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

I’ve enjoyed discussing/debating the law with you Peter. I’m an insurance defense attorney. Maybe if I pick up a few more insurance carriers or third-party administrator clients this coming year, I can afford some of your cards! You are always offering nice items.

It's funny, I just bought collectors' insurance and despite all my legal training and experience I just got too bored to read through all the fine print lol. I did, however, get the agent to confirm my understanding of the policy in writing which is something I suppose.

[cammb]

When I sell a card and state shipped it means free shipping, nothing else. There isn’t a person on this board who can guarantee that the card will be delivered. If the buyer wants insurance or priority shipping, he should state it. I am on the side of the seller on this one.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by cammb

When I sell a card and state shipped it means free shipping, nothing else. There isn’t a person on this board who can guarantee that the card will be delivered. If the buyer wants insurance or priority shipping, he should state it. I am on the side of the seller on this one.

BS, there are many of us on this forum that guarantee the card(s) they sell will be delivered or a refund will be given.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by cammb

When I sell a card and state shipped it means free shipping, nothing else. There isn’t a person on this board who can guarantee that the card will be delivered. If the buyer wants insurance or priority shipping, he should state it. I am on the side of the seller on this one.

You need to communicate that because it is not the norm on this forum. I would be pissed if you said shipped and didn't guarantee delivery.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by cammb

When I sell a card and state shipped it means free shipping, nothing else. There isn’t a person on this board who can guarantee that the card will be delivered. If the buyer wants insurance or priority shipping, he should state it. I am on the side of the seller on this one.

Of course you can't guarantee it. But you can and should, and apparently according to the rules do, bear the risk of loss.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bnorth

BS, there are many of us on this forum that guarantee the card(s) they sell will be delivered or a refund will be given.

+1
or maybe even +2

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Jim65

When sellers say $225 shipped, I'm sure they mean no extra shipping charges. I've never took that to mean the seller is claiming once shipped, he is free from any responsibility.

Your understanding is exactly correct. Arguing otherwise is disingenuous, at best.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by bnorth

BS, there are many of us on this forum that guarantee the card(s) they sell will be delivered or a refund will be given.

Concur. Standard practice of Amazon has forced every other e-business to guarantee delivery. Standard practice of internet sales should be expected on this site of collectors as well.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Kidnapped18]

This is like a law school Contracts I exam from First Year!

Larry (Buyer) is due a full refund of $225 + shipping from Brian (Seller).
Buyer never received card that he fully paid for and he should not bear any loss. Absent any language to the contrary, it is the Seller's responsibility to ensure mailing AND delivery of the card and if card is mailed but not delivered then Seller (Responsible Party) needs to refund the purchase amount.

As stated in an earlier post, 'parties can write their own contract.' You can always request/negotiate insurance be purchased on a card and incorporate that into the final price.

I don't understand why there is even a discussion of G/S v F/F via PayPal...to me both are irrelevant in this instance.

All that said Buyer does need to realize Seller did just have major surgery and have just a little more patience regardless of how many posts Seller has made in recent weeks.

It is still the Christmas season right?

Tony

[JK]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I don't mean to Jump Someone Else's Train, but this is a good idea. Having a well defined set of rules would be Just Like Heaven. It would reduce stress during those Inbetween Days when the package is in transit.

Let's make the rules crystal clear, so we can all be Lovecats.

A defined set of rules would certainly Cure some of the issues being discussed in this thread (sorry, couldn't resist).

[drcy]

"$225 shipped"

Plain language reading would mean shipped to the destination. If the destination is Toledo, I don't think "shipped to Buenos Aires" or "shipped to my cousin's house" qualifies as shipped under the circumstance. Shipped is short for "shipped to ___.

If shipped doesn't mean "shipped to you," and instead means "shipped to you or anywhere else in the world," then the word has no practical meaning and there would be no need for shipping insurance.

Not to say it isn't a "life is unfair" scenario for the seller you gave the package to the USPS. Sucks for the seller, and, as already said, it can be a financial problem for some people to have to suddenly reimburse the money.

If the seller means/wants something else ("My responsibility is to get it in the mail. If the USPS loses it, that's not my responsibility" or "$225 put it in the mail"), that can be written in the sales description.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by bnorth

BS, there are many of us on this forum that guarantee the card(s) they sell will be delivered or a refund will be given.

When you sell a card, do you state that you guarantee delivery? No one states that. It is implied. A good seller will always refund but that’s not to say he has to.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by cammb

When I sell a card and state shipped it means free shipping, nothing else. There isn’t a person on this board who can guarantee that the card will be delivered. If the buyer wants insurance or priority shipping, he should state it. I am on the side of the seller on this one.

Since you take the sellers side, do you think its ok for him to ignore PMs about lost package when he has the buyers $225 in his pocket?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by cammb

When you sell a card, do you state that you guarantee delivery? No one states that. It is implied. A good seller will always refund but that’s not to say he has to.

Many times I will say "delivered" in my for sale posts. Other times I will say shipping but insurance is on the buyer if wanted. And other times I might say all shipping and insurance at the buyers expense (or words to that effect). And some other times I don't say anything and then I expect safe delivery is on me.

It is all about communication. But there won't be more rules on our forum for this. I don' feel the need to change now and don't like too many rules. If instituted they have to be enforced. The name/anonymity rule keeps me busy enough.

and to answer James' question right above. while I agree generally, with Brian's medical issues and postage the way it is, I think utmost patience should be given. In the end it is on the seller though if nothing was discussed.

Brian- I wish you a speedy recovery, btw


.

[mckinneyj]

If I get my $$ to a seller then I expect the seller to get their card to me. Deal is done when both actions have occurred. Absent that someone needs to be made whole.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Leon

and to answer James' question right above. while I agree generally, with Brian's medical issues and postage the way it is, I think utmost patience should be given.

Leon, I don't necessarily disagree but at what point of no package and no response from seller is beyond being patient? I'd say a month is past that point.

The seller posted here on quite a few occasions in that time so a simple PM "I'm sorry, I'm having health issues" isn't too much to ask. Otherwise, how does the buyer know sellers situation? I assume the OP isn't heartless.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by mckinneyj

If I get my $$ to a seller then I expect the seller to get their card to me. Deal is done when both actions have occurred. Absent that someone needs to be made whole.

It is for you to get your money to the seller. Chances are you do it electronically.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Leon, I don't necessarily disagree but at what point of no package and no response from seller is beyond being patient? I'd say a month is past that point.

The seller posted here on quite a few occasions in that time so a simple PM "I'm sorry, I'm having health issues" isn't too much to ask. Otherwise, how does the buyer know sellers situation? I assume the OP isn't heartless.

I don't disagree he should have communicated. IF he is posting other stuff he can sure send a PM or email to the buyer. And 1 month is pretty long but right now I would almost give it about 6 weeks. But that is just me. A month is generally more than enough time without the holidays and the USPS issues.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Meanwhile, everything I order from Amazon arrives on time, whether it goes through the USPS or not.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by cammb

When you sell a card, do you state that you guarantee delivery? No one states that. It is implied. A good seller will always refund but that’s not to say he has to.

I don't agree, but Cammb's points are legitimate.

People should be clear in their sales description what they mean. I don't think it's a bad argument to say "If the USPS loses it...," but, from this thread, that's obviously not what many buyers expect. Thus, be clear in the sales description.

Further, insurance can be the option of the buyer, and if the buyer chooses not to pay for postal insurance, then that buys into Cammb's argument that the buyer is choosing to take that chance on the item possibly being lost or damaged in the mail. There, it could be fairly argued that is on the buyer.

Seller in description: "I'm not responsible for the USPS's errors. You are welcome to pay for insurance, but if you choose not to have the item insured that is your choice, I am not responsible for loss or damage caused by USPS." That's a fair enough thing to say.

Obviously, Paypal, credit card company and Facebook are final arbiters of where the money goes or stays, making many arguments moot.

Also, you're choosing to take the risk when you pay with F/F. The buyer can't claim entire innocence when agreeing to do that, as he is both agreeing to give up normal protections and it involves some dishonesty.

[jchcollins]

To me, the simplest lesson here that bears repeating and is applicable in virtually any context - is that if you are buying something like a baseball card of moderate or more value from someone outside of a forum with another stated guarantee (i.e. eBay...) then DO NOT send funds FF via PayPal. They will not cover you, because the implication is that you were giving someone money, not paying for a good or service. Just because a seller has a good reputation on a forum, or nobody else has ever had an apparent problem with them in the past does not mean your particular transaction will go off without a hitch. (Anymore, likely...) the USPS is having horrible issues and sometimes takes longer to deliver packages these days than the time in which they might have been reasonably considered flat out lost in just the recent past. The seller might have major health issues, and not be able to communicate as expected.

All could have been avoided with PayPal G&S. Honestly even though it is increasingly more expensive, this is why I sometimes stick to buying things through eBay, because their guarantee is that you GET the item, without having to wade through a lot of legal mumbo-jumbo about who bears responsibility in the case that you DON'T get the item. Thusly they paid for a $150-ish card I bought about a year ago that was either lost or stolen, even though it had been marked delivered by the USPS. PayPal should have covered me as well had that transaction not been through eBay, however. I guess I'm a double glutton for fee punishment, but I don't lose $$ on cards.

Caveat Emptor. Which to me means also that the buyer should protect their purchases in some way in every situation...

[mckinneyj]

> if the buyer chooses not to pay for postal insurance

Postal insurance is something that may only be purchased by the sender(seller), and any claim on that insurance need be made by whomever is in possession of the original mailing receipt, and, if awarded, is collected by the that person. The claimant may have to produce proof of value. IMO, not much protection for the receiver(buyer)...

https://www.usps.com/help/claims.htm

fwiw

[Jcfowler6]

Originally Posted by mckinneyj

> if the buyer chooses not to pay for postal insurance

Postal insurance is something that may only be purchased by the sender(seller), and any claim on that insurance need be made by whomever is in possession of the original mailing receipt, and, if awarded, is collected by the that person. The claimant may have to produce proof of value. IMO, not much protection for the receiver(buyer)...

https://www.usps.com/help/claims.htm

fwiw

Goods and services thru PayPal is the buyers protection.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Shoeless Moe]

Has the seller contacted the buyer and have you two worked anything out yet?

It's been 3 days since this thread was opened. I hope by now the seller has reached out..............finally.

[Fred]

Just curious, if the seller requests F/F and S/S is selected (and the 3% fee is paid by the buyer), does that mean paypal is going to side on the buyers behalf if the package is NOT RECEIVED? What if the buyer produces a legitimate tracking number to paypal? Does that have weight in the decision to side with the buyer by paypal?

Bottom line, is paying paypal S/S like putting the seller on notice that they might want to consider insuring the package?

How many people on the BST pay the 3% for S/S even though the seller is asking for F/F?

Can the seller cancel the sale if F/F was requested by the buyer paid with the S/S option (and 3% paid for by the buyer)?

Just trying to get ahead of the curve here.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Or, we could rely on a man's integrity and word, also patience, understanding, etiquette, and sense of fairness. Quite a refreshing concept in a world where too many rules allow a person to escape personal responsibility and "the right thing to do".

Precisely. Gambling debts are not enforceable but a gentleman pays his gambling debts regardless. If we have to resort to legalities here then we lose the concept of community. From a community-based standpoint, if you as a seller request PPFF you are telling the buyer that getting the item to him is on you because you are asking him to throw away all of his protections. For that reason I always, always pay via paypal's commercial process for anything expensive, even if I have to add in the 3%, just so I never have to deal with this scenario. If I want a truly unprotected transaction I can send a check or pay via Zelle or PPFF, with the understanding that I may have to eat the loss if the item doesn't arrive through no fault of the seller and if the seller chooses not to be a gentleman about the loss.

Legally speaking, I think we have a situation of in pari delicto here: both sides are culpable and the courts might not grant either relief. They agreed to use an unprotected method to transmit the payment and the item was truly lost in the mail.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Fred

Just curious, if the seller requests F/F and S/S is selected (and the 3% fee is paid by the buyer), does that mean paypal is going to side on the buyers behalf if the package is NOT RECEIVED? What if the buyer produces a legitimate tracking number to paypal? Does that have weight in the decision to side with the buyer by paypal?

Bottom line, is paying paypal S/S like putting the seller on notice that they might want to consider insuring the package?

How many people on the BST pay the 3% for S/S even though the seller is asking for F/F?

Can the seller cancel the sale if F/F was requested by the buyer paid with the S/S option (and 3% paid for by the buyer)?

Just trying to get ahead of the curve here.

PayPal guarantees delivery. They will refund when package is lost or item is different than seller described. Buyers have 180 days to file a claim. Whether they take the money back from the seller is up to them.

I guess a seller could decline a G&S when a F&F payment was asked for. Why would a seller want a buyer to forfeit their Buyers Protection? I certainly wouldn't do business with that person.

2 additional things.
PayPal requires Signature Confirmation on items over $750.

Its against PayPal rules to use F&F to pay for items, I read they are going to start cracking down on people who abuse it so everyone should be careful.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Its against PayPal rules to use F&F to pay for items, I read they are going to start cracking down on people who abuse it so everyone should be careful.

And indeed they are. The vintage card forums on FB lately have more than a few tales of people's PayPal accounts that have been mysteriously suspended without warning. In many cases these folks have admitted to taking a lot of FF payments for cards.

[Brian Van Horn]

Well, put in a report with the local post office today given the fact of the understaffed masses working the post office. This would have been put in Saturday, but there was difficulty filling out the report in what fit what category for processing. Received a call from 845-315-2235 6:05 p.m. EST. Returned the call at 6:07 p.m. EST and given an indistinct answer as to the call location although the area code matches that of the post office for the Congers area.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

And indeed they are. The vintage card forums on FB lately have more than a few tales of people's PayPal accounts that have been mysteriously suspended without warning. In many cases these folks have admitted to taking a lot of FF payments for cards.

+1 to this. I noticed this in the couple of card groups that I belong to on FB. I'd imagine Venmo might be a better alternative for those who are trying to skirt the 3% fee but still want to use an app/service.

Ultimately at the end of the day, Cash is king. I've put a hold on purchasing cards at the moment, just with all of the money being dedicated towards holiday purchases, however, I'd much rather make deals with people in person than through a service such as paypal. Not often the most convenient, and not always possible, but something that definitely ensures the card gets to the buyer and the money to the seller.

[Fred]

USPS Insurance rates:

$50.01 to $100 is $2.05.
$100.01 to $200 is $2.45.
$200.01 to $300 is $4.60.

The price per additional $100 of insurance, valued over $300 up to $5,000, is $4.60 plus $0.90 per each $100 or fraction thereof.

$500 = $6.40
$1K = $10.90
$2K = $19.9

If the insurance rate for USPS is about 1% (there about), then wouldn't it just make sense to pay the 1% USPS insurance cost rather than the PP G/S rate of 3%?

Based on the information provided, PPGS is 3% and is great for the buyer because of the protection offered.

If the buyer paid for PPGS and declined the insurance coverage offered by the seller, then it wouldn't matter if the package didn't show up (for any reason), because the buyer is protected whether or not they opted to pay for insurance. Is that abut the gist of it?

I'm still lost on how paypal could force PPGS on sales rather then PPFF. I suppose if paypal saw MANY transactions, then they could assume the payment transfers are for G/S rather than a friendly payment.

Last comment (hopefully) - Is paypal relying on the community to be honest in the transactions? I can see where paypal would like to collect fees because paypal is a business and PPFF payments are free to both sender and recipient.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Seven

+1 to this. I noticed this in the couple of card groups that I belong to on FB. I'd imagine Venmo might be a better alternative for those who are trying to skirt the 3% fee but still want to use an app/service.

Ultimately at the end of the day, Cash is king. I've put a hold on purchasing cards at the moment, just with all of the money being dedicated towards holiday purchases, however, I'd much rather make deals with people in person than through a service such as paypal. Not often the most convenient, and not always possible, but something that definitely ensures the card gets to the buyer and the money to the seller.

For those who use Venmo, they offer zero buyer protection.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Fred

USPS Insurance rates:

$50.01 to $100 is $2.05.
$100.01 to $200 is $2.45.
$200.01 to $300 is $4.60.

The price per additional $100 of insurance, valued over $300 up to $5,000, is $4.60 plus $0.90 per each $100 or fraction thereof.

$500 = $6.40
$1K = $10.90
$2K = $19.9

If the insurance rate for USPS is about 1% (there about), then wouldn't it just make sense to pay the 1% USPS insurance cost rather than the PP G/S rate of 3%?

Based on the information provided, PPGS is 3% and is great for the buyer because of the protection offered.

If the buyer paid for PPGS and declined the insurance coverage offered by the seller, then it wouldn't matter if the package didn't show up (for any reason), because the buyer is protected whether or not they opted to pay for insurance. Is that abut the gist of it?

I'm still lost on how paypal could force PPGS on sales rather then PPFF. I suppose if paypal saw MANY transactions, then they could assume the payment transfers are for G/S rather than a friendly payment.

Last comment (hopefully) - Is paypal relying on the community to be honest in the transactions? I can see where paypal would like to collect fees because paypal is a business and PPFF payments are free to both sender and recipient.

I have seen several posts that have indicated the difficulty in collecting on USPS insurance claims so that could be one reason to use G/S even if it costs more.

[notfast]

I’m surprised so many people are talking about USPS insurance. I thought it was common knowledge they don’t pay out on sports cards and in the limited cases they do, it’s a huge ordeal.

Third party or “self insure” — save yourself money over the long run.

[Directly]

Originally Posted by notfast

I’m surprised so many people are talking about USPS insurance. I thought it was common knowledge they don’t pay out on sports cards and in the limited cases they do, it’s a huge ordeal.

Third party or “self insure” — save yourself money over the long run.

So if that's the case why do they sell insurance at all?

[Jcfowler6]

Tired of seeing the term “side”. Who’s side are you on blah blah blah.

The problem is the problem. Let’s be for fixing the problem. That’s the side I’m on. Otherwise this experiment of Net54 is a failure and is no different than anywhere else.

I see the delivery service as the problem. Use PayPal good and services to avoid this type of problem. I think this current situation sucks for both the buyer and seller.

I’ve had tons of great interactions on this board and many great deals. Let’s keep moving forward.

Let’s make net54 great again. Lol. I need another bourbon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cammb]

One of my reasons for taking the sellers “side” is that I don,t like outing another member like he was some troll on eBay.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Jcfowler6

Tired of seeing the term “side”. Who’s side are you on blah blah blah.

In the case of a card being lost or damaged by the USPS, both sides have been harmed. It's not that one side is innocent and the other guilty, good or bad. They're both in a spot not caused by either of them.

[Brian Van Horn]

Just to straighten out one thing in the title, for the third time this afternoon it was stated by Audra in Larry's Conger's mail office that there was no theft.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Just to straighten out one thing in the title, for the third time this afternoon it was stated by Audra in Larry's Conger's mail office that there was no theft.

I'm curious how they can state with certainty that there was no theft. If that is the case, do they know where the package is and then why can't they just get the package delivered?