AP Extra Cover Lesson

[tastek]

eBay item number: 143604835528

I, the seller, was bullied into making a full refund for one of two fragile crystal glasses (adequately packaged but broken in transit) with false assertions from the buyer that the AP claim was the seller's responsibility.  The buyer refused to follow the AP claim process for compensation and disposed of the evidence and packaging after getting his refund.

REASONING - Being my first breakage (a newbie) after sending over 80 fine crystal pieces Australia wide (all with extra cover), getting repeated eBay "Return requests" for this item, with no suitable options (Accept return/Full Refund/Partial refund/Message buyer)  to settle the case, exhaustive messaging with the buyer, my eagerness to retain my 100% feedback rating and the fact I am still holding a AP receipt which reads inter alia "Extra Cover - Article Value $300.00 ... You need to retain this invoice in order to make an extra claim", I relented and gave the buyer a full refund.

To top it off, I received my first negative feedback for a throw away comment in my final message to the buyer after learning of his actions, voiding any possible claim. Further, I can't leave negative feedback for the buyer who misled me. eBay would be nothing without sellers, is this what I pay my 13.5%  (final value fee on item + postage) for? Where are the seller protections?

The lesson is: 
NEVER, NEVER, EVER GIVE A REFUND TO A BUYER FOR A BREAKAGE IN TRANSIT, WHERE YOU HAVE EXTRA COVER WITH AP (Its the Buyer's responsibility to claim compensation from AP)

[padi*0409]

---

@e_purchasing wrote:

Firstly , why did you give a refund? As with all states, there is a provision in their respective goods acts that state in basic terms that if delivery is by carrier (ie Aust Post) then goods are deemed delivered when you hand it to the carrier. Here is the provision for Tassie

https://www.legislation.tas.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1896-014#GS37@EN

PLEASE, do not post misleading information on the boards.

When selling on eBay delivery can only be confirmed when the tracking shows the item has been delivered in the case of an MBG dispute, Paypal looks at it differently in the case of an INR where if the seller can show lodgement then they see it as fulfilling the seller's obligation.

It is also a term in  Aust Post agreement that where damage has occurred in transit, the addressee (ie  receiver) is required to lodge a compensation claim.

Yes, BUT the buyer has the option with an eBay purchase of dealing with the problem through eBay's dispute process.

As long as you genuinely packed the item for reasonable handling and transport, there are no other ifs or buts.

WRONG, if the item has arrived broken it's the seller's responsibility under the MBG.

Let me also say that even if your buyer escalated the matter and EBAY gave them a refund, you could take eBay to fair trading citing the same legislation. Ebay is not entitled to refund from your pocket regardless of what they state in their user agreement as eBay's terms do not override legislation. Ebay can give a refund out of eBay's pocket , but not yours.

Rubbish, eBay's MBG covers the buyer in this instance.

---

[padi*0409]

---

@e_purchasing wrote:

One  extra note, don't waste your money on extra cover , unless the value is $200 or more (as Auspost has $100+post cost as standard cover), you are better off to double box glassware for extra protection that cannot be disputed

---

Had you taken the time to read the Original Post you would have seen that the item value was $300.

[e_purchasing]

Nothing misleading, I already stated that regardless of what eBay MBG says, the term is void as under contract law and LEGISLATION in Australia, Goods by carrier are DEEMED DELIVERED

37. 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.

Any term in any contract in Australia that attempts to override legislation is classed an unfair term and not applicable

padi*0409 , just because you choose to blindly accept the drivel written on eBay does not make the eBay terms correct nor valid nor does it make me incorrect on a question of Australian Law.

Ebay can put whatever they like in their terms but it does not make the term valid nor legal, especially when there is distinct legislation as explained.

[padi*0409]

---

@e_purchasing wrote:

Ebay can put whatever they like in their terms but it does not make the term valid nor legal, especially when there is distinct legislation as explained.

---

Unless you have taken eBay to court an won a case based on your premise, then I say you are wrong.

Even to take that opinion to court would inevitably mean ending up in the Supreme Court - do you have deep enough pockets to try that one out and most likely lose the case ?

Buyers and sellers agree to eBay's policies when they use the platform, that agreement would almost certainly override other legislation.

[gutterpunkz05]

Somehow I think you will find, The Australia Postal Corporation Act and the T&C,s , definitions, etc contained therin will outweigh the Tassie sales of goods act.

Also under the  AP act  74.1   Either party can claim for loss or damage.

In this case why would a buyer bother to claim via AP, risking their right to claim under ebays time limits.

[gutterpunkz05]

---

@e_purchasing wrote:

Nothing misleading, I already stated that regardless of what eBay MBG says, the term is void as under contract law and LEGISLATION in Australia, Goods by carrier are DEEMED DELIVERED

37. 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.

Any term in any contract in Australia that attempts to override legislation is classed an unfair term and not applicable

padi*0409 , just because you choose to blindly accept the drivel written on eBay does not make the eBay terms correct nor valid nor does it make me incorrect on a question of Australian Law.

Ebay can put whatever they like in their terms but it does not make the term valid nor legal, especially when there is distinct legislation as explained.

---

Nah Padi,  Nothing misleading,  just plain wrong.   Prima Facie  (accepted as correct until proven otherwise)

is not definitive proof of delivery and under the AP Act  the definition of delivery in no way includes acceptance of an item by AP for delivery.

Under the legislation  quoted by e-p,  they appear to be very selective, no reference to  37.2    and definately no reference to  32

 Duties of seller and buyer

It is the duty of the seller to deliver the goods and of the buyer to accept and pay for them in accordance with the terms of the contract of sale.

And as such  the T&C's  of ebay under which the contract of sale is formulated are indeed applicable.

[*sons_and_daughters*]

I have posted hundreds of extremely fragile items over the last 18 months. Never had a breakage. You obviously need to package better.

[janeababe]

---

@padi*0409 wrote:

---

@e_purchasing wrote:

One  extra note, don't waste your money on extra cover , unless the value is $200 or more (as Auspost has $100+post cost as standard cover), you are better off to double box glassware for extra protection that cannot be disputed

---

Had you taken the time to read the Original Post you would have seen that the item value was $300.

---

actually, the items sold for $129. +$12 ph standard with AP.

[imastawka]

But they bought 2 at that price,  Jane

[rocket2retro]

Australia Post deem glass unsuitable for postage therefore will not honour a breakage claim (although they will gladly accept the extra cover fee paid). As others have mentioned I include my own 'insurance' by double boxing in an oversized parcel.