Little eBay/paypal glitch for sellers to watch out for...

[Aces]

Why would a buyer buy insurance for the seller? Paypal says it is the seller responsibility to get package from point A to point B in the condition advertised, seems to me that even having an option to sucker the buyer into buying the seller insurance seems odd.

Huh?

 

It's the seller's job to get it to the Post Office (assuming USPS is the shipper).

The buyer needs to buy insurance from the Post Office for protection while the item is in transit and in the USPS's hands.

 

[Broken Shakespear]

I add $2 to the S&H charge that the PO will charge me, and say in my auctions that insurance is included in S&H.

 

 

 

 

-slym

 

That is a violation of the terms of service potentially, which means you could be breaching your contract, making it void, and destroying any legal ground you have. The E-Bay terms are that you cannot charge any more for insurance than what the shipper charges you. So for $50 or less at the USPS, that is $1.70. Since you hid it in S&H, they probably couldn't use it against you in court. But if a buyer produces your post here in a court case where you admit to charging $2 (and their item was $50 or less), you have breached your contract with E-Bay, which may jeopardize your contract with them.

[Broken Shakespear]

That is the fundamental problem with paypal. When I sold on ebay I stated not responsible for any item not insured. Paypal comes along with there policies and then bam, Paypal says it is the sellers responsibility to ensure the package arrives, no matter what the terms of the auction stated.

 

So why should a buyer pay for insurance when paypal will recover for them? Of course you could say no paypal, check or M/O only, buyer pays insurance. Now in THAT case it is beneficial for the buyer to buy insurance as that is THERE only protection. Of course ebay got rid of the Check or M/O payments so pretty much everyone is forced into paypal, an ebay company.

 

So with Paypal, there is no reason for a buyer to purchase insurance as they are covered, without paypal a buyer should ALWAYS purchase insurance. Now is that right? or is that wrong? I left ebay as a seller because I do not want to be told how to sell and then have paypal disagree and steal my money.

 

The answer is it probably depends. I have had three disputes against me in 10 years (one not received and the other to were false accusations and trying to rip me off, which I proved).

 

In one dispute (the not received dispute), the shipper lost the package. Paypal ruled against me (since my tracking didn't show it delivered) and took the money from my account and refunded them. I had my attorney (who is my cousin, so it cost me nothing to do so) contact Paypal and politely explain the Goods Act, and that the buyer was offered insurance and refused, and that the risk of loss was on the buyer, since they were the owner as soon as I delivered the package to the shipper. I also provided the proof that I did ship it. Paypal refunded the money to my account.

 

Now from the buyers point (and your question), if Paypal took that money back out of the buyers account to refund me, then there is a reason to buy insurance, even though you use Paypal. Now Paypal may have given us both our money and just filed with insurance too.

 

Keep in mind though, despite whatever Paypal does, the legally binding sales contract still exists, and the buyer is required to pay for the item, even if Paypal refunds the buyer their money. You are still open to legal action for not paying, which is a second reason to buy insurance, even if you use Paypal.

[slym2none]

I think my case would be thrown out of court, as I would bring examples (THOUSANDS of them) where people charge Priority rates for Media, or all those guys selling poker chips for 99¢ and charging $70 for S&H.

 

 

I mean, really... 30 cents would be worth a lawsuit? Fine, I'll drag up THOUSANDS more examples of where people charge $5 for shipping a Priority Flat Rate envelope (which costs $4.85) or $10 for a FR box (which costs $9.85.) Besides, I thought there was a small amount of leeway considering the "handling" aspect of "shipping and handling."

 

 

 

-slym

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

Darque Archer....?

[slym2none]

 

Darque Archer....?

 

Stop it... I think if that was DA, he would have said something by now.....

 

 

 

 

-slym

[Boozad]

I think my case would be thrown out of court, as I would bring examples (THOUSANDS of them) where people charge Priority rates for Media, or all those guys selling poker chips for 99¢ and charging $70 for S&H.

 

 

I mean, really... 30 cents would be worth a lawsuit? Fine, I'll drag up THOUSANDS more examples of where people charge $5 for shipping a Priority Flat Rate envelope (which costs $4.85) or $10 for a FR box (which costs $9.85.) Besides, I thought there was a small amount of leeway considering the "handling" aspect of "shipping and handling."

 

 

 

-slym

 

If you did ever have a lawsuit filed (hopefully you never do!) I don't think pointing out that other people overcharge would have any bearing on the outcome whatsoever. The other sellers aren't standing there being found out for overcharging, you are.

 

I would probably compare it to being had up for a DUI but your defense is 'well hundreds of other people do it and never get caught...' It just wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.

[Broken Shakespear]

I think my case would be thrown out of court, as I would bring examples (THOUSANDS of them) where people charge Priority rates for Media, or all those guys selling poker chips for 99¢ and charging $70 for S&H.

 

 

I mean, really... 30 cents would be worth a lawsuit? Fine, I'll drag up THOUSANDS more examples of where people charge $5 for shipping a Priority Flat Rate envelope (which costs $4.85) or $10 for a FR box (which costs $9.85.) Besides, I thought there was a small amount of leeway considering the "handling" aspect of "shipping and handling."

 

 

 

-slym

 

No, $.30 wouldn't be worth a lawsuit. But if someday you sell a $1000 comic and something goes sour and you end up in court (they claim they never got it and want their $1000), someone could point out that you have a history of violating your contract with E-Bay, which may mean that you are not eligible to sell there, which would mean the contract created between you and your buyer in that transaction is void, which could result in you loosing the case.

 

You know how lawyers look for angles to attack you, and violating your contract with E-Bay, and then making it public that you do so, opens up an angle of attack for them, if a much larger case worth a lawsuit ever came up.

 

There is leeway if you just say S&H, because no one can really define an absolute price for what the handling amount should be. But you just came here and stated that you add $2.00 to shipping and handling to cover insurance. So you defined that $2 of your S&H was specifically for insurance.

 

No one on E-bay could file a complaint against you for overcharging on insurance, because you defense would be that it is S&H and that only the exact insurance amount was included under the shipping component. But of they could produce a copy of your post here, they would have a case against you that you were indeed overcharging.

 

I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. It's a super longshot any of this would ever happen. But I wouldn't go around random message boards disclosing it.

[slym2none]

Oh, I don't go to just any random message boards to post that kind of stuff. Only the biggest and best will do!

 

 

 

 

-slym