Buyer Gave Neg Unfairly

[21ladyluck]

Buyer bought a puzzle from me. It's securely wrapped and put in a large envelope to keep the postage down.

So there is NO tracking unless the buyer wants to pay for a "signature", which they don't for low cost items.

I always take photos while at the post office of the buyers address and AP postage imprint.

Buyer emailed me she never got it. I sent her the photo showing it was sent and to check with the post office.

She said it was my fault as there was no tracking. That wouldn't have helped anyway as we all know. I explained why.

I said I was sorry but I'm not responsible and will not give a refund. After all, I have NO proof that she did not get it and simply wanted the money back. We all know there are some buyers like that.

So she's given me neg feedback unfairly. It's the first one I've gotten and I have over 1500 feedbacks.

How do I reply to her negative feedback to tell the truth about what happened ??

Pam

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@colic2bullsgirlore wrote:

---

@the_billycan wrote:

---

@phorum_junkie* wrote:

Anything unregistered can be dropped in a box, regardless of the method of postage payment.

My point exactly, a printed stamp label is exactly the same as one you buy and stick on yourself, they are not lodged in the same as a registered letter or a parcel, there is no record of them in the system other than the fact a 'stamp' worth $x has been purchased exactly the same as if you buy an ordinary stamp. 

---

Once again, what seller would pay for postage for an item they had no intention of posting, given that it was such a low value item. I suppose it is unlikely a seller would rely on a photograph as proof of posting for an expensive item but then again if the item is expensive, surely they would request registered mail anyway. For the purposes of the OP, I would say a picture of a sealed, stamped, addressed envelope is proof enough. You don't agree? That's OK, just don't expect Preypal to refund you.

BTW, next time a mail clerk asks you to put the mail you have just lodged in the letter receiver outside, I would refuse if I were you.

---

Im with you billycan. Once the post office employee has handled the article and the postage is paid then the AP TOS deems it

lodged.

By handing the lodged item to a person other than the receiver (without ascertaining that that person is authorized to accept the

receivers mail) then the AP employee has broken a Commonwealth law and breached  AP's terms and conditions

and enabled the 'Theft of mail before it is delivered' see the link below.

Whether the item is eventually successfully delivered or not is irrelevant to the original breach

http://www.afp.gov.au/contact/report-a-crime.aspx

---

Colic, this has been  bee in my bonnet for quite some time, I recently received a response from Australia Post saying that once a letter had been posted that the sender could take it back. Is this true? I got caught up with the Postal Acceptance Rule. But the sender is Not the authorized receiver, so how does this all fit in?

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@colic2bullsgirlore wrote:

---

@crikey*mate wrote:

---

@digital*ghost wrote:

---

@crikey*mate wrote:

---

the disclaimer will be ineffective - your disclaimer cannot trump the law.

---

---

---

---

Disclaimers can't trump the law, but that is a legal disclaimer to make and many businesses do make just such a disclaimer (except on ebay, where it is a breach of policy to state that you won't take resposibility for lost or damaged mail unless a registered / insured service is selected).

Consider the scenario where a seller uses C&S without SOD - no cover at all, but proof of postage is provided. The buyer can not enforce a refund or compensation from the seller or Australia Post. The only reason PayPal facilitate refunds (from the seller) for INR is when the seller can't prove they posted, ergo (I presume) the assumption is that they didn't.

In a court of law, the proofs required would be quite different, and would encompass a much broader range of evidence.

I understand most of the time discussions here are limited to the world of eBay and PayPal, and there are practicalities involved when dealing with both, but the world is much bigger than those two. 

---

Dig, policies don't trump the law in real life either

The law tells us when we are and aren't responsible for something and it doesn't matter if Snow White and seven secret ninjas write a disclaimer, if it is against what the lasws say a consumer's rights are and what a seller's responsibilities are, then it's just not going to stick.

and you're going to have to make the rest of your post using smaller words and slowert typing, cos I'm not understanding.

and tell me what proofs that you believe would be required in a court of law for whatever it is you're talking about, cos I'm struggling to join the dots (and I've had 3 hours sleep now, too!)

---

Crikey All these rather larger companies have a disclaimer that avails the buyer of the risks and also the exact point where

the title of a remotely bought item  changes from seller to buyer.

They do this to reinforce the clauses of the SOGA by which the exchange is controlled .

Disclaimers do not override contract law but rather

....they are a part of the contract ....

ticketmaster

 Tickets sent by normal mail or express delivery cannot be traced and no responsibility will be taken for tickets sent by this method. Alternatively your tickets may be collected from the venue on the day of the performance. Please check box office operating hours. In some instances where a venue collection is not available, alternative arrangements may be offered. Please check the purchase page for that event.

sugar free zone

Liability
Whilst we will take due care to adequately pack your goods, we cannot be held responsible for goods damaged or lost due to circumstances that are beyond our control. This applies to goods in transit or after delivery. We will gladly follow up on any delivery problems with Australia Post, but by placing an order with Sugar Free Zone Pty Ltd, to the extent permissable by Australian law,
the purchaser absolves Sugar Free Zone Pty Ltd and its employees of any responsibility for the goods once they have been delivered in good condition to our local post office.

mothers direct wholly owned  Subsidiary of Australian breastfeeding association

Your order will be dispatched by either Australia Post standard mail or independent courier. Please choose which method you would like to use at the check out. We strongly advise that orders over $200 in value are sent by courier, as these orders can be tracked. Mothers Direct can not be liable for goods lost in transit by Australia Post, as these are not trackable.

New style direct

# Titles to the goods purchased by you remain with us until you have paid for them.  Once the goods are paid for in full, the title will pass to you. .
# Risk in the goods passes to you when the goods are taken from storage at our warehouse for delivery to you.  We recommend that you insure the goods until delivery to you.

bluray entertainment

Where returned goods are lost, or damaged in transit THE BUYER will hold full responsibility and will be required to consult with the 3rd party shipment provider in an effort to obtain compensation in this instance. Under such circumstances, BLURAY ENTERTAINMENT will not offer any form of refund, exchange or store credit.
This is in the same manner as BLURAY ENTERTAINMENT applies when we send goods to all of our customers in good faith.




danoz direct

Danoz Direct will not be responsible for items that are lost or misdirected

Title to the goods purchased by you remains with us until you have paid for them. Once the goods are paid for in full, the title will pass to you.

---

most of those mention trackable post which is on point

but doesn't ownership of an item pass to the "buyer" once the contract is formed? If the buyer then doesn't pay, or the seller doesn't 'send" doesn't this give rise to a further action for non performance?

For a contract to be formed, consideration is an element that must be satisfied, but consideration can consist of "the promise to pay"

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@crikey*mate wrote:

---

@colic2bullsgirlore wrote:

---

@the_billycan wrote:

---

@phorum_junkie* wrote:

Anything unregistered can be dropped in a box, regardless of the method of postage payment.

My point exactly, a printed stamp label is exactly the same as one you buy and stick on yourself, they are not lodged in the same as a registered letter or a parcel, there is no record of them in the system other than the fact a 'stamp' worth $x has been purchased exactly the same as if you buy an ordinary stamp. 

---

Once again, what seller would pay for postage for an item they had no intention of posting, given that it was such a low value item. I suppose it is unlikely a seller would rely on a photograph as proof of posting for an expensive item but then again if the item is expensive, surely they would request registered mail anyway. For the purposes of the OP, I would say a picture of a sealed, stamped, addressed envelope is proof enough. You don't agree? That's OK, just don't expect Preypal to refund you.

BTW, next time a mail clerk asks you to put the mail you have just lodged in the letter receiver outside, I would refuse if I were you.

---

Im with you billycan. Once the post office employee has handled the article and the postage is paid then the AP TOS deems it

lodged.

By handing the lodged item to a person other than the receiver (without ascertaining that that person is authorized to accept the

receivers mail) then the AP employee has broken a Commonwealth law and breached  AP's terms and conditions

and enabled the 'Theft of mail before it is delivered' see the link below.

Whether the item is eventually successfully delivered or not is irrelevant to the original breach

http://www.afp.gov.au/contact/report-a-crime.aspx

---

Colic, this has been  bee in my bonnet for quite some time, I recently received a response from Australia Post saying that once a letter had been posted that the sender could take it back. Is this true? I got caught up with the Postal Acceptance Rule. But the sender is Not the authorized receiver, so how does this all fit in?

---

Post 24 in this thread

Items not being delivered

[thecatspjs]

---

@phorum_junkie* wrote:

Anything unregistered can be dropped in a box, regardless of the method of postage payment.

My point exactly, a printed stamp label is exactly the same as one you buy and stick on yourself, they are not lodged in the same as a registered letter or a parcel, there is no record of them in the system other than the fact a 'stamp' worth $x has been purchased exactly the same as if you buy an ordinary stamp. 

---

No it is not the same from my read of Aust Post General Terms and Conditions.  It relates to when an article (including a letter) is considered lodged - and in the situation you described it seems to be pretty much considered lodged when the post paid label is afixed to the letter.

Articles that have been lodged may only be retrieved under particular circumstances and such a request must be put in writing and agreed to by AP.

The "no record of them in the system" is also not true.  If you have paid for the post price and a post paid label has been processed at the PO (not stamps), there is indeed a record of that article being paid for and lodged at that Post outlet. 

[21ladyluck]

UPDATE ... just got off the phone with eBay and they REMOVED the neg feedback I received. I'm back to 100% positives yea!!!

So my fight against a scam buyer came to a good conclusion.

Big thank you to eBay Customer Service !!!!

Pam

[imastawka]

So, let me get this straight....

Buyer pays you for puzzle....never receives it....no tracking.......you refuse refund.....

buyer gives you neg fb.......and you complain to ebay and they remove neg fb......

And this is fair, how?

As a buyer I would want to know that you do not want to solve any problems!