topic Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit in Selling

eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

1688store — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 08:21:17 GMT

Hi everyone,

I personally think eBay should implement a policy regarding item lost in transit. We as sellers should not be held responsible for item lost in transit because our responsibility is to send the item off within a timely manner and if the item is lost in transit that is way out of our control.

Also eBay should implement a policy that if the buyer doesn't use any shipping method with tracking code the seller is not liable for any item lost in transit.

However if they selected a shipping method with tracking code and the item is lost in transit then the seller can help the buyer try to recover the goods or get compensation for the buyer.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

imastawka — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 08:37:17 GMT

@1688storewrote:
Hi everyone,

I personally think eBay should implement a policy regarding item lost in transit. We as sellers should not be held responsible for item lost in transit because our responsibility is to send the item off within a timely manner and if the item is lost in transit that is way out of our control.

Also eBay should implement a policy that if the buyer doesn't use any shipping method with tracking code the seller is not liable for any item lost in transit.

So, if a seller uses an envelope/large envelope then all they have to say is they posted it - and keep the buyer's money - and the goods

However if they selected a shipping method with tracking code and the item is lost in transit then the seller can help the buyer try to recover the goods or get compensation for the buyer.

It's called opening an INR case

Did I understand you correctly?

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

1688store — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 08:51:30 GMT

I meant if the buyer open an item not recieved case against the seller and if the buyer win the case the seller is making a loss. In this case if the seller send item by regular letter service then there is no tracking code and carriers will not offer the seller for any compensation.

The only evidence for proof of delivery on eBay INR cases is the tracking code.

@imastawkawrote:
@1688storewrote:
Hi everyone,

I personally think eBay should implement a policy regarding item lost in transit. We as sellers should not be held responsible for item lost in transit because our responsibility is to send the item off within a timely manner and if the item is lost in transit that is way out of our control.

Also eBay should implement a policy that if the buyer doesn't use any shipping method with tracking code the seller is not liable for any item lost in transit.

So, if a seller uses an envelope/large envelope then all they have to say is they posted it - and keep the buyer's money - and the goods

However if they selected a shipping method with tracking code and the item is lost in transit then the seller can help the buyer try to recover the goods or get compensation for the buyer.

It's called opening an INR case
Did I understand you correctly?

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

imastawka — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 09:06:42 GMT

Sellers of items sent as letters should self insure for loss. It's not that hard.

And ebay has a policy for lost items - the INR, so I fail to understand what you mean

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

1688store — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 09:10:43 GMT

eBay does not have any policy for items lost in transit. If buyer opened an INR case and the seller will lose the case if the seller can't show the tracking code.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

kopenhagen5 — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 09:20:02 GMT

That's why most sellers only send with tracking or signature on delivery.

Tracking or sig is for seller protection.

I noticed you sell with free postage, perhaps drop the item price by a dollar or two and send with sig $4.95 as postage.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

k1ooo-slr-sales — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 09:21:26 GMT

wrote:

The only evidence for proof of delivery on eBay INR cases is the tracking code.

the only items that should be sent by untracked means are low cost items. Sellers can “self-insure*” against claims by adding 10 cents to their postage/handling charges on every item they sell and think of it as the recompense for the occasional INR claim.

Sellers should be charging for tracked shipping on higher cost items. After all, it is the buyer that then pays for the seller protection.

Smart sellers know this, those that don’t will fall by the wayside.

*the first poster I recall posting this advice is phorum_junkie*.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

1688store — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 09:26:31 GMT

There is no such thing as self insure. Only licensed insurance providers can offer insurance based on your conditions.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

davewil1964 — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 09:32:28 GMT

As said, eBay do have policies in place.

What you are after is protection from INRs based solely on your word and the fact you won't self-insure or send tracked.

There is an option.

There's a mob around that will allow you to send your stock to them. They determine the selling price and the shipping method and indemnify the 'seller' against non-delivery (by posting themselves). They then remit any amount left over, after charges, to the 'seller'.

Simple. Although I suspect the return would be substantially less than the profits from selling the items yourself, even after factoring in the odd INR.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

k1ooo-slr-sales — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 09:44:23 GMT

@1688storewrote:
There is no such thing as self insure. Only licensed insurance providers can offer insurance based on your conditions.

really????? Are you going to take every word posted literally? Why do you think I put it in quotation marks? It was a figure of speech.

March

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

clubesquire — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 10:41:06 GMT

OP, even tracking is a way of 'self insuring.'

I think you're missing the point.

And, someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but if you're talking about actually insuring a package against loss in transit, well that's the Sellers responsibility, not the customer's, or eBay's. YOu either encapsulate this in your item price, or postage price, or be like us and only insure with certain destinations, in which case we do it without the buyers knowledge.

Melina.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

1688store — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 10:54:33 GMT

Can anyone please provide me with an actual link about eBay policy actually stating the seller is responsible for the item lost in transit.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

countessalmirena — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:07:58 GMT

@1688store

I realise what you mean; it sounds as though you've probably had experience of items which the buyers say never arrived - and because those items were sent by some untracked means, you simply had to wear the loss (giving either a refund or a replacement).

I can see your dilemma. It does seem unfair that a seller should be responsible for any error or failure on the part of the delivery service. After all, in terms of law in Victoria (I'm referring to Victoria as it's the state in which I live), the Goods Act 1958 addresses the limit of responsibility of the seller when it comes to distance selling and the use of carriers.

39   Delivery to carrier
(1)   Where in pursuance of a contract of sale the seller
   is authorized or required to send the goods to the
   buyer, delivery of the goods to a carrier, whether
   named by the buyer or not, for the purpose of
   transmission to the buyer is prima facie deemed to
   be a delivery of the goods to the buyer.
(2)   Unless otherwise authorized by the buyer, the
   seller must make such contract with the carrier on
   behalf of the buyer as may be reasonable, having
   regard to the nature of the goods and the other
   circumstances of the case. If the seller omit so to
   do, and the goods are lost or damaged in course of
   transit, the buyer may decline to treat the delivery
   to the carrier as a delivery to himself or may hold
   the seller responsible in damages.

So, strictly speaking, according to the legislation, the seller's legal obligation ends with delivering the goods to the carrier - as long as the contract with the carrier (the method of delivery, the issue of insurance or cover or tracking, etc.) is reasonable in terms of the sort of item purchased, and whatever circumstances are relevant for that particular purchase. (Unless the buyer specifically declines a reasonable/appropriate method of postage, or the buyer requests a reasonable method of postage which the seller doesn't use.) Of course, the seller may still find him/herself having to defend an action in court if the goods are lost - and presumably that would only happen if the goods are of a significant cost, otherwise it's very unlikely that the average purchaser would go to the trouble and expense of such action.

But none of that is the point insofar as eBay is concerned. eBay has its own policies, to which members explicitly agree. Those user agreements (which so few of us actually read, true?) are periodically revised and re-sent, and members must tick the "agree" box before they're able to proceed and use eBay.

It might be annoying for sellers, but unfortunately that's the situation - that part of the eBay user agreement includes eBay reserving the right to refund buyers who claim that an item hasn't arrived, and eBay will reimburse themselves from the seller. As you can read on the relevant page, "You'll have to reimburse eBay if we refund one of your buyers under eBay Money Back Guarantee, unless you provide proof that the item was in fact delivered as described. This reimbursement will be debited from your PayPal account, or charged to your monthly selling invoice."

The only proof eBay will accept as proof that the item was delivered is "online tracking information that shows:

The delivery status of the item as delivered
The date of delivery (proving it was sent within the promised handling time)
The delivery address, which must match the buyer's address as shown on either the Order Details page or the PayPal's Transaction Details page
Proof of the recipient's signature on delivery (for items valued at $750 or more)."

Sellers clearly need to protect themselves in some way. For items of high value, it would be madness to send it to an eBay purchaser without using a postage method that is fully tracked, with signature required when appropriate, and by a method that is as secure as you can manage - because it's the delivery status that matters, not just proof that the item was posted. In my opinion there's no reason for a seller to absorb the cost (or full cost) of such postage for those high-value items, and I think most buyers would not find it unusual to pay for the appropriate postage method. (I certainly don't. I might wince at some postage costs, but I'd rather have my items get to me in the safest possible way.) But on the other hand, if the seller is offering free postage, the profit margin must be high enough for the seller to absorb the cost of fully tracked and covered postage. I think it would also be wise for sellers to add the appropriate insurance cover, in the event of the item being sent but not arriving (according to the tracked status) - because eBay will reimburse the buyer in that case, and it's the seller who will be out of pocket unless the appropriate insurance cover has been added.

For low-value items, I know that sellers may not be able to justify the cost of fully tracked postage. Offering low-cost postage (or even free postage) may be the only way to generate sales. In that case, an effective way of covering the inevitable percentage of missing items/items that never arrive/items that the buyers say never arrived would be calculate that percentage, work out what it costs on average per hundred items or so to cover the losses, and from that, increase either the item price or the postage price (just slightly will be all that's needed) so that the total increase over those hundred sales is enough to form your own "insurance cover" from which you can cover your losses. I believe that's what sellers call "self-insurance".

It might sting to let the occasional buyer get away with a false claim of non-arrival; it is, after all, blatant theft. But you're never going to be able to change human nature. There will always be the occasional person who doesn't let their conscience prevent them from stealing. Because you can't change it, it's not something that (in my opinion) ought to be something that you allow to gnaw ceaselessly at you as either a seller or a human being.

From what I understand, sellers who send by an untracked method (or who send by a tracked method but can see that the tracking doesn't show delivery) - if informed by their buyer that the item hasn't arrived - have one best recourse... and that's to refund before the buyer (or the seller) escalates the claim by asking eBay to step in. (I think I'm correct in saying that eBay's stepping in earns sellers a defect.)

Of course, if you were making it an issue of principle, I suppose you could challenge eBay's automatic refund by taking them on legally, demonstrating proof of delivery to the carrier, and asserting that eBay had no right to charge you for their reimbursement to the buyer. If ever this got to court, it would be Australian law that informed the outcome - and I don't really like eBay's chances of standing on the user agreement when it seems to demand that its users contract themselves out of their legal rights (and it may be argued that sellers have a legal right not to be obliged to cover the cost of a purchased item lost in transit). That is complicated contract law, though - there may be unfair contract terms in the user agreement, but it would cost a great deal of money, a very good lawyer, and a lot of determination to pursue it. That is why sellers look for ways that are easier to implement and maintain to avoid incurring damaging losses under eBay's terms.

(It's not fair; it might not stand up in court; but court is almost certainly not a viable option. Don't forget, too, that if the contract between you and eBay is considered void after a court battle, eBay would certainly then remove you as a seller, buyer, member, anything. They do have the right to ban members for whatever reason they wish, and that would be something that I believe you couldn't fight.)

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

padi*0409 — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:10:10 GMT

@1688storewrote:
Can anyone please provide me with an actual link about eBay policy actually stating the seller is responsible for the item lost in transit.

Too easy, first eBay's MBG.

https://pages2.ebay.com.au/eBay_Money_Back_Guarantee

Then Paypal's buyer and seller protection.

https://www.paypal.com/au/selfhelp/topic/BUYER_AND_SELLER_PROTECTION_AU

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

imastawka — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:21:38 GMT

@1688storewrote:
eBay does not have any policy for items lost in transit. If buyer opened an INR case and the seller will lose the case if the seller can't show the tracking code.

Somehow you think repeating something will make it either clearer or right.

It's like yelling at someone who doesn't speak English.

It's been explained seven ways from Sunday.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

lyndal1838 — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:26:42 GMT

There is not much use quoting State Laws....the only Law ebay operates under is NSW Law.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

springyzone — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:38:39 GMT

@1688storewrote:
Hi everyone,

I personally think eBay should implement a policy regarding item lost in transit. We as sellers should not be held responsible for item lost in transit because our responsibility is to send the item off within a timely manner and if the item is lost in transit that is way out of our control.

Also eBay should implement a policy that if the buyer doesn't use any shipping method with tracking code the seller is not liable for any item lost in transit.

However if they selected a shipping method with tracking code and the item is lost in transit then the seller can help the buyer try to recover the goods or get compensation for the buyer.

What you're describing is pretty much how it used to be on ebay over a decade ago. The buyer paid the money and if they wanted extra such as tracking, they paid more. But here's the rub. If their item didn't come (even if they had paid for tracking) there was not a thing they could do about it.

Back in those days a seller could ignore you, ignore any queries-nothing you could do. If a month or so later you dared to give them a neg they could reply that it wasn't their fault, blame the post.

Now I'm asking you to look at this from the point of view of a buyer because that sort of thing happened to me a few times. Say you had paid over maybe $40 & you got nothing, plus no proof anything was posted (& I think we can take it that if those things still haven't arrived after 12 years or so, they weren't posted, the seller lied), how likely is it you'd be keen to keep using ebay?

The answer in 2018 is not very likely, because there are lots of other online places to buy & they're reliable.

If you send something without tracking and it gets lost, I think a buyer should be entitled to money back as there is no proof you sent the thing. Basic as that.

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

digital*ghost — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:42:36 GMT

I'll preface this by saying that I think eBay's MBG policy and how it functions has some serious flaws, but that I also have always been happy to practice its basic premise (buyer receives their item, or gets a refund).

Some of those flaws certainly do concern packages either lost or delayed in transit, especially international items where customs clearance can take a long enough time beyond eBay's ETA for a buyer to open an INR even on a fully tracked package, gain a refund, and then receive the item some time after, so for me a "lost in transit" policy, has some merit in dealing with situations where a package is verifiably in transit, but has not yet been delivered.

But that's because ebay doesn't particularly care that an item was posted, they care if an item was delivered, and the surrounding circumstances as to why it's not delivered don't matter to them in the vast majority of cases. A tracking number alone will not win an eBay INR case, it has to show that the item was delivered.

Let's take eBay out of the equation for a moment, and just focus on the relationship between a buyer and a seller. eg Say you were selling on your own website, you posted an item, and the buyer contacted you to say it was not delivered. What would you do? If you're the buyer instead, what would you like for the seller to do?

If the package was tracked and let's assume they don't open a PayPal claim or anything like that, you could then lodge an equiry with Australia Post and seek compensation once the package is confirmed as lost, and if you receive compensation, you then pass it on to the buyer. This process, however, can't be started until at least 10 business days after positing (on regular mail), and usually takes a minimum of 30 days to complete, and from experience the compensation can then take about 2 weeks to arrive in the mail. That means your buyer then has to wait around two months from the date of purchase for a domestic item, before they are compensated...if they are compensated. Think about this objectively for a moment and honestly ask if that sounds like a reasonable business practice, and then also think about how an eBay policy that accounts for this scenario will actually work.

If you didn't send the item they bought tracked and were not eligible to receive compensation, what would you tell the buyer, or what would your reaction be as a buyer if a seller you bought from told you that? In other words, putting all policies and legal obligations aside - what do you feel are your ethical obligations as a seller, and do they align with how you would like to be treated as a buyer?

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

1688store — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:42:38 GMT

I agree with your response to eBay relies on NSW laws. According to the NSW Fair Trading Department the buyer must read the seller's terms and conditions about lost (undeliverable) or damaged item in transit.

Source: http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/ftw/Consumers/Ways_to_shop/Online_shopping.page#Who_is_responsible_for_undelivered_goods_or_damage_in_transit?

Re: eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

countessalmirena — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:44:07 GMT

@lyndal1838

I thought I recalled that, Lyndal. (But I didn't double-check that particular point, hence just referred to the VIC legislation.) Thank you!

In any event, the Sale of Goods Act (NSW) has the same provision (section 35). The wording is the same. But it is definitely worth pointing out the specific Act which applies.