I sympathise with your frustrations, I really do, but it will never become the responsibility of the buyer to pay more to ensure their item arrives to them.
If you're selling something online, it's your responsibility to ensure it arrives to the customer. You can choose to pay extra for that piece of mind, or just send it with standard post and cross your fingers.
I also think AP should take responsibility for even standard post but as it stands, buyers shouldn't have to pay more.
It would be like if you did your weekly grocery shopping online through Woolies. You order, pay and wait for delivery. Suddenly, a couple of days later, Woolies contact you and say their truck broke down and your frozen food spoiled. Because you didn't pay them an extra fee to make sure your order came, you're out of pocket. You'd be on them in an instant telling them their truck is their problem and you want what you ordered.
It's exactly the same with eBay customers.
|
My personal opinion is that, as a seller, I know and understand the risks of using an online platform to sell, and am prepared to take on the burden of that risk - it is in line with buyer expectations anyway, but not current Australian law, and quite frankly I think eBay needs to rethink disallowing sellers to say "no responsibility for lost mail if registered is not selected", because, particularly with the advent of C&S, many sellers can and will practice that and are not able to inform their customers before they make a purchase. Although I think a seller should chase up a missing item no matter what, what that line is actually saying is 'no financial responsibility'.
If a buyer selects / accepts a standard form of postage (including C&S) and the seller has proof of postage, which is now possible in a variety of uninsured ways, there is nothing that impels them to refund the buyer for an item not received. If the buyer selects an insured service, the seller has a legal obligation to seek any compensation payable and pass it on to the buyer. Buyers and / or sellers may not like it, but these are facts and I think they very clearly shows who (according to law and nothing else) is responsible for insuring an item.
As I said, I assume these risks anyway, but people should actually be informed of all risks (whether they are small or not) when buying online - fact is, if a seller is using any form of postage that gives them proof they sent it but not insurance, any refund from the seller is, to use AP's favourite word, discretionary.
