Buyer Refunded for lost item.... Now delivered

[thehoarderhouse]

Hi all
A buyer recently opened a case for a lost item (after lodging an inquiry with Aus post first).
Australia post advised that it was likely lost. They refunded me (the seller) which I promptly passed onto the buyer and the case was closed.
The item has now been delivered to the buyer. So now they've got their items for free!
Hardly seems fair.
I would be more than happy to send Australia Post back their refund .... but as the buyer opened a case for the unrecorded item and did not message me directly I cannot contact them - even though they had said they would definitely let me know if it did arrive.
Is there a way to contact the buyer after a case is closed?
No wonder postage costs are getting higher and higher!

[thehoarderhouse]

Ooops - undelivered item....not unrecorded

[tazzieterror]

Are you still able to view the listing for the item you sold them? On there (as well as via your 'my eBay: All Selling' view) there should be a link to 'Contact buyer'.

The other thing you can try is using eBay's online chat support and asking them to contact the buyer on your behalf with a message.

I'm not actually sure what eBay's and AP's stance is on refunded 'lost' items that are eventually delivered - eBay's CS agent might be able to advise whether it's worth messaging the buyer or if the matter is considered closed still.

[thehoarderhouse]

Thanks very much but contact buyer options are now disabled in that sale.....I presume that's protection for buyers and sellers in the event the case hasn't been an amicable resolution for either party to prevent any online harassment.
Much appreciate your input though🙂

[davewil1964]

I'm unsure what your issue is.

I understand that the buyer has the item and their money, but that would surely be between AP and the buyer. You have your money, so at this point you have what you would have had if there had been no delivery delays.

Given the buyer isn't contactable, you only have AP tracking showing the item as delivered, which isn't always true.

But, as I said, it is nothing to do with you any more. If AP wants their money back, AP should have had the tracking number flagged and should be pursuing the matter themselves.

[*tippy*toes*]

Buyer paid you. You got the money. Item was late arriving. AP paid the refund to the buyer, not you, but via you. If you get the buyer to repay, then you are effectively being paid twice. You have the money for the item. This is a non issue.

[countessalmirena]

davewil, I heard an acquaintance speaking of a recently received order which he had placed back in March. His loudly stated view was that Australia Post "owed it to [him]" for "mucking [him] about".

I'm not of the same view; it was obvious that the delay and presumed lost in transit status was a COVID-19 casualty. I ventured to suggest this; I was shouted down (but quite politely). I retired, crushed*, to the balcony beyond Zoom range.

(*Not noticeably, though. One slice of cheesecake and I was fully revived.**)

(**Oh no! Dismay deflates me once more! The bin man just went past and I'd not put out the blue (recycling) bin which is as stuffed as an aubergine!          👟🏃🏼‍♀️🏇🌪🗑🚚🗑🏃🏼‍♀️👟💨 <-- symbols to signify extreme speed and breathlessness ...... I am back, having successfully completed Mission Blue Bin. Cunningly placing the blue bin on the nature strip of a very obliging neighbour on the opposite side of this quiet and secluded thoroughfare has triggered the bin man to pause his truck. Rubbish gone. Thanks shouted out to neighbour together with sempahore gestures. Bin dragged back up the driveway curving with blue-grey steepness around the lavender and sacred bamboo and rosemary.)

[tazzieterror]

---

@*tippy*toes* wrote:

Buyer paid you. You got the money. Item was late arriving. AP paid the refund to the buyer, not you, but via you. If you get the buyer to repay, then you are effectively being paid twice. You have the money for the item. This is a non issue.

---

Technically AP were refunding the seller, not the buyer, as it was the seller who engaged the services of AP and between whom a contract was formed. The fact that the seller refunded the buyer via eBay is a seperate issue.

If AP (or their insurance company) were to now seek a return of the refunded amount (and I admit I have no idea if this is something likely to happen), they would be pursuing the seller and not the buyer.

So while in one sense I agree with your point that the seller has been 'made good' and shouldn't be seeking re-payment from the buyer now, it's not an unreasonable request to be making either, IF the intention were right and there were some chance of the seller being stung now that delivery has been made.

[danieh_6]

100% agree with tippy, the problem has been solved I'm not sure why OP needs to be paid twice, Auspost stuffed up, and if it was LiT (Lost in transit as per case) you are not required to reimburse australia post after it was delivered extremely late as they are breaking the contract of delivery time-frames.

Tazzie your post made 0 sense and making the point "it's not an unreasonable request to be making either" Yes it is unreasonable because the problem has been solved, the buyer was unhappy and they have been compensated, the seller should not be profiting off this. Why should the seller be paid twice for the item?

[tazzieterror]

---

@danieh_6 wrote:
... the seller should not be profiting off this. Why should the seller be paid twice for the item?

---

To borrow your own "logic", why should the buyer be profiting off this? Why should the buyer get both the item and the refund?