eBay Should Implement a Policy for Lost in Transit

[1688store]

Hi everyone,

I personally think eBay should implement a policy regarding item lost in transit. We as sellers should not be held responsible for item lost in transit because our responsibility is to send the item off within a timely manner and if the item is lost in transit that is way out of our control.

Also eBay should implement a policy that if the buyer doesn't use any shipping method with tracking code the seller is not liable for any item lost in transit.

However if they selected a shipping method with tracking code and the item is lost in transit then the seller can help the buyer try to recover the goods or get compensation for the buyer.

[k1ooo-slr-sales]

---

@1688storewrote:

From business point of view the self insurance is not feasible because wasting a lot of money in the long run and what about when you have more than 100 INR cases.

In reality buyers are thieves because they already found the loophole to lie to eBay about that they haven't received the items. To really solve this problem eBay should add to their existing policies that the seller can't be held liable for items lost in transit because the carrier delivered the items to the buyer.

---

if you are being targeted by unscrupulous eBay buying thieves you need to include tracking on all your items by not giving the buyers any choice.  If you think this will make your items uncompetitive then what is the cost of hundreds of INR case refunds compared to potential lost sales through adding tracking cost to every listing?

You can’t expect genuine buyers who do not receive their item to just lump it, and you can’t expect eBay to cover the refund costs for untracked items as this would send seller fees through the roof.

[1688store]

I'll give you an example:

Buyer selected untracked shipping - Seller should not be responsible for items lost in transit because the seller only handing over the items to the carrier to deliver to the buyer.

Buyer selected tracked shipping - Seller should help the buyer because the seller can get compensation from the carrier for items lost in transit.

eBay should add this to their existing policies to better cover sellers and buyers.

[k1ooo-slr-sales]

---

@1688storewrote:

I'll give you an example:

Buyer selected untracked shipping - Seller should not be responsible for items lost in transit because the seller only handing over the items to the carrier to deliver to the buyer.

Buyer selected tracked shipping - Seller will help the buyer because the seller can get compensation from the carrier.

eBay should add this to their existing policies to better cover sellers and buyers.

---

there are many who think eBay has many scammers . . . . . if your suggestion is taken up by eBay then the number of scammers will jump tenfold (in my opinion).

AGAIN, don’t give your buyers any choice of postage, include tracked postage on all listings (this is what eBay ultimately wants).

[brerrabbit585]

---

@1688storewrote:

From business point of view the self insurance is not feasible because wasting a lot of money in the long run and what about when you have more than 100 INR cases.

In reality buyers are thieves because they already found the loophole to lie to eBay about that they haven't received the items. To really solve this problem eBay should add to their existing policies that the seller can't be held liable for items lost in transit because the carrier delivered the items to the buyer.

---

Words fail me so I won't even try to answer the bit I've bolded.

If ebay do what you suggest you'd sell absolutely nothing because buyers would assume all sellers are thieves when a few unscrupulous sellers don't post items because they know they can get away with it.

[digital*ghost]

---

@1688storewrote:

From business point of view the self insurance is not feasible because wasting a lot of money in the long run and what about when you have more than 100 INR cases.

In reality buyers are thieves because they already found the loophole to lie to eBay about that they haven't received the items. To really solve this problem eBay should add to their existing policies that the seller can't be held liable for items lost in transit because the carrier delivered the items to the buyer.

---

It is impossible to waste money when self-insuring, because the funds come from the buyers themseleves, since it is included in the price you charge.

On the $6 item, instead you charge $6.10, or $6.20. This is how businesses all over the world, big and small, handle shrinkage (the term used for lost stock due to things like theft), even when they have other systems in place like security cameras, security tags that set off alarms, and even security personel trawling the store and keeping an eye on people - they are all costs the business outlays to protect themselves, and yet every time someone buys from them, they get the funds to cover those costs and make a profit. When you buy an item from anywhere, you are contributing to the cost of items other people stole. 

This of course shows that some people are thieves, but you can't paint everyone with the same brush - it's wise to be informed about what can happen with some transactions, and take measures to protect yourself, but if you start to feel resentment towards your customers, and treat everyone on the assumption that they'll lie and steal, even if your business somehow becomes wildly successful, you will not enjoy your job. 

Again I ask, would you be happy to accept the seller saying "too bad" if you bought an item that was never received? 

[1688store]

For buyer the tracking code is the proof that the seller in an actual fact has sent the items and not giving false information.

[digital*ghost]

---

@k1ooo-slr-saleswrote:

and just to clarify for everyone, when I buy low priced items and am given the choice between tracked and untracked I will choose untracked every time.  Why should I pay for the seller’s seller protection?

---

Just speaking in general - tacked only helps the seller in a PayPal case, which is less relevant on eBay, you're not giving the seller any additional protection by paying for it with regards to an eBay INR case. 

Tracked also doesn't just give the seller protection, anyway. I know you have a PO box, so you don't need to consider when an attempted delivery will be made, but others do. Some also pay for things like registered or SOD because they want to protect the item from safe-drop, or being stolen after delivery (that, I personally think is the buyer's responsibility, if it's a frequent occurrence and they're buying a letter rate item. I feel a little rage bubble any time someone contacts me about an INR for an untracked large letter, and they then feel the need to tell me that a lot of their mail gets stolen.  That's one of the things the registered service was introduced for, about 100 years before the internet and online shopping existed). 

[1688store]

To answer your question:

Let's say you sold only 100pcs @ $6.20 per item = $620.00

Lets say you self insure only $20

What if there are 10 INR cases against you. $20 will only cover 3pcs @ $18 and you will be making a loss of $42.

[digital*ghost]

---

@1688storewrote:

To answer your question:

@Let's say you sold only 100pcs @ $6.20 per item = $620.00

Lets say you self insure only $20

@What if there are 10 INR cases against you. $20 will only cover 3pcs @ $18 and you will be making a loss of $42.

---

My suggestion was an example only. If you need to cover $62 for every 100 sales, then you charge $6.60 or $6.65, rather than $6.00.

Are you worried that you'll experience a 10% INR rate, or is that the actual rate you're experiencing? 

[1688store]

This is just an example but it doesn't mean that it will never happen in reality because there are too many cyber criminals online.