think i'm being scammed by a buyer...

[basil1160]

I recently sold a videogame, the seller had the option to choose registered post for a bit extra, but choose standard post instead. 

My postage prices include the HANDLING costs of a item, the materials to pack the item, petrol to go to the town to post it ect... 

now he is saying he never got it. he admitted the postie left items on top of his letter box ... 

it has almost been a month, i posted it on the 2/01/13... maybe the mail is backed up from new years??

I don't know what do do..

i have the postage receipt as proof that I did send the item. and he acknowledges i did send it, but is still saying he never got it. 

I can't help but feel he has gotten the item... which is why i will be contacting his LPO first thing tomorrow morning, and I already sent a inquiry to australia post about the missing article...

regards basil1160... 😞

[tall_bearded]

Please be advised I run a free advocacy and advisory service for small sellers who sell on line.

As a seller you are entitled to the protection provided by the deemed delivery provisions of the Sales of Goods Act, however to avail yourself of those rights you must able to prove, on the balance of probabilities that  you sent the item, and contrary to popular eBay myth that proof is not limited to what PayPal will accept as proof.

However before I can advice further, I need some specific details as to the postal service you used. 

That is, was it sent as a large letter, or parcel post? 

If it was sent by large letter do you maintain a postal register, and if yes how, is it maintained? 

If it was sent as parcel post what service was used?  That is, was it sent In a satchel or a box.

If was sent parcel post how did you pay?  That is was it sent Click and send or eParcel of did you hand the item over the counter, and if handed over the counter how was it paid for; credit/debit card or cash..

Finally if you paid by card or cash, did you keep a copy of the receipt.

Once you have provided the above information I will advise you further.

[basil1160]

what is click and send?

[tall_bearded]

Then it problem solved.

As previously stated all you have to do is prove you posted it, and the Click and Send documentation is proof that even PayPal will accept that it was posted.

Therefore you now need to decide whether, though  here is no legal obligation on you to do so, are you prepared to refund the buyer on an ex gratia basis even though, the most likely reason the buyer didn’t receive it was because to save a few dollars on postage, they chose an unsafe delivery service.  This choice is yours and yours alone to make.

If you choose not to make an ex gratia payment and the buyer files a PayPal claim all you need to do is provide PayPal with the Click and Send documentation and that should be the end of the matter.

Finally if PayPal for some inexplicable reason decide the claim in the buyer favour come back to me and I’ll advise you on how to dispute that decision.    

[phorum_junkie*]

Deemed delivery has nothing to do with Paypal and the end result of your constant crusade to force Paypal to cover sellers when they have no proper proof of delivery will end up with everybody, buyers and sellers, having to pay more when Paypal change their seller protection so that sellers have to provide proof of delivery, not just proof of posting.

They will either have to do that or they will increase the fees.

The concession for Australia that proof of posting was sufficient was put in place because there used to be no cost effective way of posting with proof of delivery, to the actual address and AP were prepared to compensate if you had a post code receipt or a purchase receipt for satchels anyway so it wasn't a problem.

Things are very different now, click & send is an affordable service that carries seller protection and if sellers choose not to use the service, or register their parcels, it will be everyone that suffers in the end.

[leader-of-the-band]

Then it problem solved.

As previously stated all you have to do is prove you posted it, and the Click and Send documentation is proof that even PayPal will accept that it was posted.

did I miss some post? Did the OP say they used Click and Send?

I did see a post where the OP asked "what is click and send?"

[phorum_junkie*]

No leader, you didn't miss anything, the OP obviously did not use click and send!

back to the deemed delivery, when referring to it, not that it has anything to do with Paypal policy, why do you only ever quote the part about it being deemed delivered when handed to the carrier without quoting the next part:

(1) Where, in pursuance of a contract of sale, the seller is authorised or required to send the goods to the buyer, delivery of the goods to a carrier (whether named by the buyer or not) for the purpose of transmission to the buyer is prima facie deemed to be delivery of the goods to the buyer.

(2) Unless otherwise authorised by the buyer, the seller must make such contact with the carrier on behalf of the buyer as may be reasonable having regard to the nature of the goods and the other circumstances of the case; and if the seller omits to do so, and the goods are lost or damaged in course of transit, the buyer may decline to treat the delivery to the carrier as a delivery to himself or may hold the seller responsible in damages.

[tall_bearded]

“Deemed delivery has nothing to do with Paypal’

Deemed delivery is a right conferred by statute.  Therefore the only way it wouldn’t  apply to PaPal is if they induced the seller to contracted out. 

Now statue say once handed over to the carrier, subject to the exemptions in sub section 2,  the item is deemed delivered.  The PayPal agreement says if there is proof that it was handed over to the carrier and it was sent to the correct address, they can’t reverse the payment.  Therefore though they use different words the outcome is the same, and if the outcome is the same then the policy simply mirrors the statute.

That is not only does deemed delivery apply to PayPal, but their entire Buyer and seller protection policy is based on it.

“and the end result of your constant crusade to force Paypal to cover sellers when they have no proper proof of delivery”

Please show that part of the PayPal agreement which requires the seller to provided proof of delivery.  In fact, it’s not a case of me forcing PayPal to accept proof of postage in lieu of proof of delivery.   Instead, isn’t it a case of the PayPal user agreement stipulating that proof of postage is all the seller is required to provide.  So how does simply repeating something that PayPal says in its own policies translate into my “crusade”. 

“will end up with everybody, buyers and sellers, having to pay more when Paypal change their seller protection so that sellers have to provide proof of delivery, not just proof of posting”.

The alternative is PayPal limits buyer protection to those instances where the buyer chooses and pays for a secure mode of delivery thus reducing its exposure to make discretionary payments.

“The concession for Australia that proof of posting was sufficient was put in place because there used to be no cost effective way of posting with proof of delivery, to the actual address and AP were prepared to compensate if you had a post code receipt or a purchase receipt for satchels anyway so it wasn't a problem.

Wrong! There is no concession.  PayPal had two options.  They could draft their policies to mirror  the legislation, or they could draft the policy so the seller contracted out of the legislation.  They chose the former. 

Things are very different now, click & send is an affordable service that carries seller protection and if sellers choose not to use the service, or register their parcels, it will be everyone that suffers in the end.

Has the same deficiencies in logic as all of the above.

“when referring to it, not that it has anything to do with Paypal policy, why do you only ever quote the part about it being deemed delivered when handed to the carrier without quoting the next part”:

In fact where the circumstances require it I quote both parts.  That is, when referring to proof of postage and where the circumstances require it  I am in the habit using the words “subject to”.  0In fact, if memory serves I have in the past specifically stated  deemed delivery doesn’t apply in cases where the seller forces delivery by carrier even when the buyer wants to pick it up.  Also if memory serves in other threads I have said deemed delivery doesn’t apply where the buyer paid for registered post and the seller sent it Click and Sent regular post.  Oh and by the way in connection with the first instance the exemption doesn’t come out of what is said in Section 32(2) but what is said in Section 29  

Section 32(1) deems delivery at the time the item has been handed over to the carrier.

 Sub section (2) provides for those circumstances where even if the item has been handed to the carrier deemed delivery may not apply, but those circumstances are limited to where the seller failed to “make such contact with the carrier on behalf of the buyer as may be reasonable having regard to the nature of the goods and the other circumstances of the case” with those circumstances in the context of item not received being limited to proof that the seller sent the item to the wrong address.

But as you accuse me of cherry picking let’s throw a few more sections into the pot

Section 32 (4)(a) the seller may at his discretion, on behalf of the buyer, insure the good against loss during their sea transit and in so doing shall be deemed to be the agent of the buyer and shall be entitled to receive from him the cost of the insurance

Please note who the use of the word “agent” and who pays the insurance

Or section 33 “Where the seller of goods agrees to deliver them at his own risk at a place other than that where they are when sold, the buyer must, nevertheless, unless otherwise agreed, take any risk of deterioration in the goods necessarily incident to the course of transit. 

Does that not mean that before the goods are at the seller risk, the seller must first agree to accept that risk.  And in turn doesn’t that mean if the seller doesn’t agree then they are at the buyer rick.

What I’m saying is the meaning of one section will be largely dependent on what is said in another.  Therefore before you can provide informed advice you actually have to have read it.  That is all of it.  And once you have read it, you would then have to read the principle authorities dealing with that legislation with a good starting point being “that airplane case” and the discussion paper I have previously provide you dealing with on how “that airplane case’ has clarified some of the uncertainty about how consumer legislation apples to eBay. 

[tall_bearded]

Sorry Basil I misread your post 16.

Click and Send is a Aust Post service where you pay the postage on line and in return you get a document which proves that not only did you pay the postage but also proof that you handed it to Aust Post.

Unfortunately, the service is limited to satchels and boxes only.  That is not for large letters.

Quite frankly if you are sending things in boxes or satchels it the best postal option there, is not only because it cost less than the other comparable services provide by Aust Post, but it also provides proof that PayPal must accept that it was posted and posted to the correct address.

So, as you obviously didn’t sent it Click and Send can you please provide the information previously requested.

Unfortunately I will now be absent until Thursday morning,  So I won’t be able to provide you with a response to then.

[lyndal1838]

Sorry Basil I misread your post 16.

Click and Send is a Aust Post service where you pay the postage on line and in return you get a document which proves that not only did you pay the postage but also proof that you handed it to Aust Post.

How exactly does C & S prove that you handed the parcel in at the PO?  It can prove that you paid the postage on a parcel to be sent to a specific address...but that alone does not guarantee that it was actually handed in at the PO, unless it is scanned.

[tall_bearded]

Because, when you hand it over to Aust Post, they scan it.

That is, before you can produce the label you must pay for it.  Therefore you have proof you paid the postage.

Before you can produce the label you have to impute/import the data.  So now, not only do you have proof postage has been paid, you also have proof to where the parcel/satchel  was to be sent.

Finally when you hand the parcel/satchel to the Aust Post staff they scan it with the tracking information being proof it was posted.  That is they can’t scan it unless you actually give it to them to be scanned.   So now not only do you have proof postage was paid and proof as to where the parcel/satchel was to be sent, you also have proof you gave it Aust Post.