AustPost now has tracking on everything- does PayPal accept it?

[kustomizer99]

AP still 'offer' a signature-required 'service' for $2.95, but will now PP accept the standard tracking as it pertains to Seller Protection?

I hope so, this would save a packet and increase sales. I for one would certainly start listing a heck of a lot more.

[kustomizer99]

'You only have to provide proof of postage for Paypal'

Not when I've had to tangle with them. You have to (or HAD to, then) provide proof of delivery.

[historicaonline]

'You only have to provide proof of postage for Paypal'

Incorrect. If you've been lucky enough to catch a slacker at PayPal who'll accept a receipt and reject a claim purely on it, you should be buying a lotto ticket.

In my experience, they have requested proof of lodgement (receipt is not proof of lodgement - it needs to show the address of where you sent it and stamped by AP), and it needs to have proof of delivery (address including suburb etc - not the next suburb over, the LPO, the mail centre etc). It's a warm fuzzy if it's traceable in between. 

PayPal may tell you that they have had plenty of people send in receipts and they assess them on a 'case by case' basis but a) that is a pure grey area in their policy as it stands which they are entitled to reject and b) I don't enjoy grey areas when some dodgy scammer wants to play silly buggers.

I am sure many of you think some of us are being over-excitable and should just take our chances but for the time and effort we put in and the bias in the system, this is the very last way we have to protect ourselves and it's now in doubt. That's worth being worried about.

[punch*drunk]

If you have lost a claim and you were able to provide proof of postage as outlined in the paypal policies, then you can make a complaint to the finacial services ombudsman.

Proof of postage is all thats required in Australia, unfortunately paypals staff get confused because the US policies are different.

[thecatspjs]

IMO its just so wrong to waste ombudsman time on pursuing paypal on the basis of this alleged "loophole".

Punch drunk when a seller posts to you something very expensive and it doesn't arrive, and you lose paypal claim and are out of pocket as seller provides postcode receipt that proves they could have sent your parcel or an empty box to an address in your suburb, you might then consider change your advice to others regarding this. 

[punch*drunk]

IMO its just so wrong to waste ombudsman time on pursuing paypal on the basis of this alleged "loophole".

Punch drunk when a seller posts to you something very expensive and it doesn't arrive, and you lose paypal claim and are out of pocket as seller provides postcode receipt that proves they could have sent your parcel or an empty box to an address in your suburb, you might then consider change your advice to others regarding this. 

I'm not sure why I would need to change my advice when its correct.

Regardless of what any of us think of the law or paypal policies, they are what they are. Legally a seller is only responsible to get the item to the carrier, this has been established many times on this board.

Personally I would refund or replace if I thought an item was genuinely lost, but i'm not every body elses moral compass. Most of the people that come to these boards want their questions answered with facts rather than what others would like the facts to be.

All financial institutions have policies and guidelines they need to adhere to, the ombudsman is there to make sure they do. Its not wasting there time to ask them to do their job.

[thecatspjs]

punch drunk, scammers don't have a moral compass.

[thecatspjs]

think punch .... think

[punch*drunk]

punch drunk, scammers don't have a moral compass.

Are you worried I've let out some kind of state secret and now all the sellers will start sending empty boxes to their buyers to scam them out of a few dollars?

Its not a good idea to let the wrong information stay on the boards without being addressed. You DO only need proof of postage (as outlined in the policies) for seller protection, if you are not happy with that then perhaps you could take it up with someone who has the power to change the laws.

[thecatspjs]

No, I am not worried about some type of "secret".

As a buyer, I want sellers to send by appropriate posting method that is fitting with dollars paid.

As a seller I send by appropriate posting method for $$$ value of purchase and offeres best protection for buyer and seller.  Not moral motivation, its just good business.

As a citizen I don't want our ombudsmen, financial services or postal, tied up with issues that are essentially based on poor paypal wording - there are far more important matters that ombudsman were set up to do - truly protect consumers - not reward retailers for not sending goods by appropriate methods that are readily available, albeit more expensive in last week or so.

As a discussion board poster and ebay buyer and seller, I don't want other posters to encourage others to post goods by method that is not in best interests of any customer on ebay, IMO t doesn't help buyers or sellers or build safe trading environment where buyers can have confidence that there are safeguards in place.  I do wish buyers knew about alleged seller protection regarding post proof, but most buyers only simply don't, nor should be expected to.

[viewmont1071]

No, I am not worried about some type of "secret".

As a buyer, I want sellers to send by appropriate posting method that is fitting with dollars paid.

As a seller I send by appropriate posting method for $$$ value of purchase and offeres best protection for buyer and seller.  Not moral motivation, its just good business.

As a citizen I don't want our ombudsmen, financial services or postal, tied up with issues that are essentially based on poor paypal wording - there are far more important matters that ombudsman were set up to do - truly protect consumers - not reward retailers for not sending goods by appropriate methods that are readily available, albeit more expensive in last week or so.

As a discussion board poster and ebay buyer and seller, I don't want other posters to encourage others to post goods by method that is not in best interests of any customer on ebay, IMO t doesn't help buyers or sellers or build safe trading environment where buyers can have confidence that there are safeguards in place.  I do wish buyers knew about alleged seller protection regarding post proof, but most buyers only simply don't, nor should be expected to.

Actually as a buyer you need to select the method of post that is most appropriate to convey the goods that you are buying especially of a seller offers choice.

It has always been like that.

Paypal has lulled buyers into believing that a seller is responsible for the actions of a third party when actually the seller becomes the buyers agent after the buyer chooses and accepts the terms of freight that they require and the seller merely delivers the buyers goods to that third party.

Paypal pushes sellers to use a more secure freight mode than that is required thereby allaying some/most of paypals SPP risk

"As a citizen I don't want our ombudsmen, financial services or postal, tied up with issues that are essentially based on poor paypal wording"

The plain fact is that in this country the sale of goods act deemed delivered to carrier clauses procludes paypal from requiring evidence an article has been "delivered to the buyer" to meet the SPP terms.

So... if you really want to help buyers then start reeducating them that

... wait for it...

they need to be responsible for their own actions and make informed decisions regarding the product that they are contemplating buying at distance and selecting appropriate delivery methods rather than pandering to PP needs like a flock of sheep

Paypal have not changed their SPP requirements

So, last week, last year, or whenever if you were denied a  PP claim because you had a dated postal receipt with the buyers postcode and were not told by paypal that to satisfy clause D of the SPP eligibilty requirements all you needed was a stat dec that stated you sent the item to the address on the PP transaction summary page

... but rather asked for  registered post form...  or a tracking number...  or a signature upon delivery

....... then you were dudded.... baffled with BS and generally obfuscated through blatant, biassed subliminal advertising...

Good busines provides choice and allows buyers to make appropriate decisions after being given factual information regarding freight culpability.

Poor business perpetuates PPs fraud that sellers are responsible for delivery.

Sellers are required to meet the standards laid out in the SOGA and make buyers aware of their responsibilities