What is the protocol on receiving insurance money for a damaged comic?

[Jiminy_Cricket-migration]

I wonder how many times a seller could file an insurance claim with USPS before they cut him off. If there are no limits on amount of claims, some scammers could make a nice living off them, in so many ways.

 

Have a VG and NM copy of Avengers 1? Sell the NM copy to a friend, mail him both, and have the co-conspirator claim the NM copy he bought was damaged. Take pics of the VG copy, and claim that was the NM copy that was damaged. Get paid by USPS and keep your original NM copy to boot!

 

What about a restored NM and unrestored NM copy? Claim the unrestored copy was the one damaged. Again, get paid (for the higher $$ unrestored), while keeping your unrestored book. Does the USPS have a restoration detection expert on payroll?

 

I'm sure scammers could come up with more scenerios if they put some thought into it.

[mschmidt]

Actually I'm not as sure about my point of view as I was before thanks to seanfingh

 

So I'll throw out this final hypothetical and see if any answers persuade me.

 

Let say $1000 book, buyer pays $32 for shipping to the seller for 'Priority Mail', which is the only way the seller ships, included in 'Priority Mail' per the post office website is insurance up to $1000. Seller fills out shipping and insurance forms, mails books.

 

Lets say the book is damaged in transit. Buyer shows pics to post office, they say book is 50% damaged. So they will pay $500 to the named claimant, who is the seller (his name is on the paper).

 

OK now for the question: You can get either $500 and the damaged book (FMV questionable) or the original $1000. Who chooses who gets what and why?

 

I would say the buyer, because they fronted the money for insurance/shipping (FOB Shipping Point) AND to a lesser extent, they're the customer (as the seller you've already got your money and the rest should be about making the customer happy, which they will not be if the item they bought is destroyed in transit).

 

 

(Please do not count the trouble of middleman paperwork, although it could be a factor...)

 

So what if we changed the example to $999 insurance payout as they value the book to be worth $1 (actual FMV questionable) after the incident? Who chooses then who gets what? I feel like the answer should be the same as above.

 

A good seller would ask the buyer what he prefers - either return the item and get a full refund, or keep the item and get a partial refund. No matter what, both the buyer and seller are made whole - which is the whole point of having the insurance in the first place.

[fantastic_four]

Let say $1000 book, buyer pays $32 for shipping to the seller for 'Priority Mail', which is the only way the seller ships, included in 'Priority Mail' per the post office website is insurance up to $1000. Seller fills out shipping and insurance forms, mails books.

 

Lets say the book is damaged in transit. Buyer shows pics to post office, they say book is 50% damaged. So they will pay $500 to the named claimant, who is the seller (his name is on the paper).

 

OK now for the question: You can get either $500 and the damaged book (FMV questionable) or the original $1000. Who chooses who gets what and why?

 

I would say the buyer, because they fronted the money for insurance/shipping (FOB Shipping Point) AND to a lesser extent, they're the customer (as the seller you've already got your money and the rest should be about making the customer happy, which they will not be if the item they bought is destroyed in transit).

 

That makes perfect sense to me. The seller did the insurance buying on behalf of his customer and gets the claim money, but if he starts thinking that a service I paid for should benefit him and doesn't send it right on to me, he's going onto my mess list.

[fantastic_four]

A good seller would ask the buyer what he prefers - either return the item and get a full refund, or keep the item and get a partial refund. No matter what, both the buyer and seller are made whole - which is the whole point of having the insurance in the first place.

 

If by "partial refund" you mean "every red cent the shipper paid on the claim," then I agree. The seller does NOT get a cut of the claim total. You want a cut, o hypothetical seller? You should have paid half of the insurance. Anything else gets you onto my mess list for stealing a service that I paid for in full.

 

On the flip side, if the shipper declined to pay the claim yet it was clear to me that they were at fault and the seller wasn't trying some shenanigans, I wouldn't expect the seller to reimburse me because the shipper didn't, I'd hold the shipper accountable. Shipping is a separate service that none of us can realistically replace FedEx/UPS/USPS with anything else...I just view them as a third party that I hope does their job.

[mschmidt]

If by "partial refund" you mean "every red cent the shipper paid on the claim," then I agree. The seller does NOT get a cut of the claim total. You want a cut? You should have paid half of the insurance. Anything else gets you onto my mess list for stealing a service that I paid for in full.

How is there any stealing going on when you, as the buyer, are made whole (either through a full refund or keeping the item & getting a partial refund)?

 

 

On the flip side, if the shipper declined to pay the claim yet it was clear to me that they were at fault and the seller wasn't trying some shenanigans, I wouldn't expect the seller to reimburse me because the shipper didn't, I'd hold the shipper accountable.

I applaud your principled stand here, but how exactly would you do that? If the USPS declines the sellers insurance claim, there's absolutely nothing you can do about it - are you honestly saying that if that happened, you'd just shrug it off & eat the loss? If so, you are very much in the minority - my experience is that if something goes wrong in the mail, the buyer expects to be compensated and they don't care who's to blame.

[fantastic_four]

If by "partial refund" you mean "every red cent the shipper paid on the claim," then I agree. The seller does NOT get a cut of the claim total. You want a cut? You should have paid half of the insurance. Anything else gets you onto my mess list for stealing a service that I paid for in full.

How is there any stealing going on when you, as the buyer, are made whole (either through a full refund or keeping the item & getting a partial refund)?

 

Because I paid for the insurance. Your interaction with the insurance company is a courtesy to me as a responsible seller--if you choose to interfere with a service I paid for, I blame you for that. It seems like you're not even aware you're interfering with my insurance payout by keeping part of it--good lord, this had never occurred to me that sellers might not realize they're just brokers, but I suppose it should have given that the contract is really between that seller and the shipper. I already knew it was risky to buy shipping insurance to begin with, but sellers monkeying with the payout never occurred to me until now. If I paid for the insurance, it's really none of your business to make any decision at all with that claim reward, so your angle about whether or not I was fully refunded is irrelevant to me because *I* paid for it! Allowing a seller to even be in that broker position to interfere when I pay for insurance is something I'll never do again.

[Chespirito]

I am nobody here, but it should be one of two ways for it to be fair...keep the damaged book and half the insurance, or return the book, keep all the insurance...just me thinking though

[revat]

I am nobody here, but it should be one of two ways for it to be fair...keep the damaged book and half the insurance, or return the book, keep all the insurance...just me thinking though

 

I think most people agree on this point. But I think the disputed point is WHO chooses who gets what? I feel like the person who fronts the money for the insurance should get to choose.

[fantastic_four]

I am nobody here, but it should be one of two ways for it to be fair...keep the damaged book and half the insurance, or return the book, keep all the insurance...just me thinking though

 

In your scenario, are you assuming the insurance company paid a claim for the full amount of the item even though it only lost half its value? Usually insurance doesn't do that--they pay for the exact amount of the damage. If they do pay for full item replacement for whatever reason, why should it be halfsies if the buyer and seller didn't go halfsies on the insurance cost?

 

This really is a minor issue compared to the fact that you shouldn't buy shipping insurance because FedEx, UPS, USPS, etc will never pay you full value for most CGC books. They don't have any better way to value them than most insurance companies do, which is to say they don't have any decent way to value them at all. Specialty insurance is the only way to go.

[Chespirito]

I am nobody here, but it should be one of two ways for it to be fair...keep the damaged book and half the insurance, or return the book, keep all the insurance...just me thinking though

 

Specialty insurance is the only way to go.

 

 

I was assuming full value was paid though..it makes sense what you are saying

[InvstmntComcSuply]

If, for any reason, you as the buyer, would like to keep a damaged book, you are at the mercy of the seller to come to some agreement. The seller has the contract with the shipper/insurer. The seller holds all the cards, save your trump card. ie; You can return the damaged book and get a full refund.

 

It is the sellers responsibility to deliver the product as described.

 

[fantastic_four]

I am nobody here, but it should be one of two ways for it to be fair...keep the damaged book and half the insurance, or return the book, keep all the insurance...just me thinking though

 

I think most people agree on this point. But I think the disputed point is WHO chooses who gets what? I feel like the person who fronts the money for the insurance should get to choose.

 

I suspect sellers who think it's their right to choose what happens to the claim when the buyer paid for the insurance just feel generally entitled to shipping and insurance being paid for by the buyer because it is a fairly common convention. In the case of shipping, it makes sense for the buyer to pay--the item needs to travel to where they're located, so yea, you pay for the item to come to your place on this planet Earth. Whether you buy from Amazon, Sears, ComicLink, or Joe Blow on Craigslist, the mechanics of getting the item to where you're at are mostly up to you.

 

Insurance is different. First off, it's usually optional. Amazon, ComicLink, Best Buy, Heritage--none FORCE me to pay insurance. If a seller makes it mandatory AND feels entitled to do what they want with a claim--well that's just a level of feeling entitled that's over the line. No, sir, that mess doesn't fly. You want a stake in an insurance claim, you pay into the insurance.

[fantastic_four]

The seller holds all the cards

 

That's what hadn't occurred to me until this thread, that paying for insurance puts you at the seller's mercy. Never again. Buying a product--which shipper-provided insurance definitely is for CGC books--from a seller-broker who may or may not ever even deliver that product if it's ever needed is just not a good idea from any angle that I can approach it.

 

It's a more viable option on items that are lower-cost and easier to value.

[revat]

If, for any reason, you as the buyer, would like to keep a damaged book, you are at the mercy of the seller to come to some agreement. The seller has the contract with the shipper/insurer. The seller holds all the cards, save your trump card. ie; You can return the damaged book and get a full refund.

 

It is the sellers responsibility to deliver the product as described.

 

I generally agree with your point, you are more or less at the mercy of the seller pragmatically, but I'm more interested in who has the enforceable legal rights.

 

I feel like if I explicitly added $$ to my purchase price to pay for insurance, I should have the right to the insurance proceeds. And if it (insurance proceeds) goes through the seller first to get to me (because he did the paperwork), thats fine, but I think I should have the enforceable legal rights to the proceeds, whatever they are. The seller basically becomes an agent representing the buyer to the insurance company, nothing more or less. Seller has already been paid for his part (got cash). So the seller than has no other job other than to hand the proceeds (whatever they are) from insurance company to the buyer. Now in the US, the buyer may still retain right of return due to the Uniform Commercial Code, and can still get a full refund if he prefers, and just leave the seller with the right to the insurance proceeds (of which the damaged book is a part of). But that buyer protectionism is just a cost of doing business.

 

This is what makes sense to me, and in the future it might be smarter for ALL of us to work out details more explicitly in any deals we make.

[mschmidt]

Insurance is different. First off, it's usually optional. Amazon, ComicLink, Best Buy, Heritage--none FORCE me to pay insurance. If a seller makes it mandatory AND feels entitled to do what they want with a claim--well that's just a level of feeling entitled that's over the line. No, sir, that mess doesn't fly. You want a stake in an insurance claim, you pay into the insurance.

 

This is getting silly.

 

Amazon, Comiclink, Heritage, Best Buy, whatever company you name - they all carry shipping insurance on their items which is factored into the shipping cost passed onto you, the buyer. The fact that it doesn't specifically spell out "you are paying X for the postage and Y for the insurance" on their invoices means jack squat.

 

If you receive an item from Amazon that's damaged and file a claim with them, you can be absolutely certain that Amazon is turning around and filing a claim with their insurance provider at the same time - they will ask you to ship the item back, reimburse you in full and, in turn, get reimbursed from their insurance company.

 

Good luck telling Amazon how they should be handling this claim :thumbsup:

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Insurance is different. First off, it's usually optional. Amazon, ComicLink, Best Buy, Heritage--none FORCE me to pay insurance. If a seller makes it mandatory AND feels entitled to do what they want with a claim--well that's just a level of feeling entitled that's over the line. No, sir, that mess doesn't fly. You want a stake in an insurance claim, you pay into the insurance.

 

Again, all of those places are responsible to deliver the product to you in the condition described. If it is not, you get all your money back (once you return the damaged item (if the seller wants it back)).

 

It doesn't matter whether it is insured or not.

 

Note: Heritage and Comiclink both say they insure shipments. But again, they would hold the cards dealing with a partial loss negotiation.

[fantastic_four]

Note: Heritage and Comiclink both say they insure shipments. But again, they would hold the cards dealing with a partial loss negotiation.

 

Isn't insurance an option with ComicLink and Heritage? Anyone had trouble getting something from a consignment company who knows how they handle it?