General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[Mapleleafvann]

what does one do if the USPS tracking says "delivered/in mailbox" and the recipient hasn't received the package? have never had this happen and now twice in two weeks.

 

It's happened to me a couple of times...both on the receiving end. In my experience, it's best to wait a couple of days, but it certainly doesn't hurt to call your local USPS (source of the delivery) branch and ask about it.

 

Both times it was the USPS' fault. Regular person was on holidays and the fill-in person sent that same post; delivered in/at mailbox. I walked around the neighbors' homes thinking it was delivered to the wrong address...nope. I waited for a day.....then called the USPS, where they checked with the delivery person and they confirmed that they delivered it....then changed their story and said that it was delivered to my door. Yeah....no panic on my part there. After 2 more days of this junk, it was found that it was delivered to the parcel locker but the mail person didn't leave the key.....nice!

 

Second time, the package was somehow left on the truck and it never got delivered....so it begs the question as to HOW they can say it was delivered it it wasn't. Regardless, they made a special delivery and I received my package promptly after that since both of these events happened within a 10 day period.

 

Call the source branch tomorrow morning to start a trace....if problems persist, the Post Master General also has a web address for formal complaints and inquiries about missing packages,

 

Best I can suggest---wish you good luck!

 

V.

 

 

[BlowUpTheMoon]

I'm taking CAK under my wing. Like those teen makeover movies. He's going to be boardie of the year material when I'm done with him.

 

You could start with that awful avatar of his.

 

Agreed

 

anyone else with suggestions?

 

Help him set up a second account so he can post while on his vacation.

 

Also help him prepare a curse laden message to Arch for getting the strike.

[Timmay]

I'm taking CAK under my wing. Like those teen makeover movies. He's going to be boardie of the year material when I'm done with him.

 

You could start with that awful avatar of his.

 

Agreed

 

anyone else with suggestions?

 

Help him set up a second account so he can post while on his vacation.

 

Also help him prepare a curse laden message to Arch for getting the strike.

 

 

Ooh, he can pull a transplant and post a few journals.

 

[Sqeggs]

Here's a provision from PayPal's TOS:

 

4.5 No Surcharges. You agree that you will not impose a surcharge or any other fee for accepting PayPal as a payment method. You may charge a handling fee in connection with the sale of goods or services as long as the handling fee does not operate as a surcharge and is not higher than the handling fee you charge for non-PayPal transactions.

 

Am I wrong in interpreting this provision as ruling out passing along PP's fees to a buyer?

[revat]

Here's a provision from PayPal's TOS:

 

4.5 No Surcharges. You agree that you will not impose a surcharge or any other fee for accepting PayPal as a payment method. You may charge a handling fee in connection with the sale of goods or services as long as the handling fee does not operate as a surcharge and is not higher than the handling fee you charge for non-PayPal transactions.

 

Am I wrong in interpreting this provision as ruling out passing along PP's fees to a buyer?

 

I never saw this before. Very interesting....I've also never pp surcharged before...

 

tough to enforce, but hopefully those with the strictest moral codes who were previously surcharging will cease to do so.

[Sqeggs]

Here's a provision from PayPal's TOS:

 

4.5 No Surcharges. You agree that you will not impose a surcharge or any other fee for accepting PayPal as a payment method. You may charge a handling fee in connection with the sale of goods or services as long as the handling fee does not operate as a surcharge and is not higher than the handling fee you charge for non-PayPal transactions.

 

Am I wrong in interpreting this provision as ruling out passing along PP's fees to a buyer?

 

I never saw this before. Very interesting....I've also never pp surcharged before...

 

tough to enforce, but hopefully those with the strictest moral codes who were previously surcharging will cease to do so.

 

Seems as if it's becoming increasingly common in sales threads to ask for PP + 3%,

[crassus]

Here's a provision from PayPal's TOS:

 

4.5 No Surcharges. You agree that you will not impose a surcharge or any other fee for accepting PayPal as a payment method. You may charge a handling fee in connection with the sale of goods or services as long as the handling fee does not operate as a surcharge and is not higher than the handling fee you charge for non-PayPal transactions.

 

Am I wrong in interpreting this provision as ruling out passing along PP's fees to a buyer?

 

I never saw this before. Very interesting....I've also never pp surcharged before...

 

tough to enforce, but hopefully those with the strictest moral codes who were previously surcharging will cease to do so.

 

It does appear to rule out the explicit and overt "add 3% for paypal" etc, but it cannot comprehend the invisible calculations that any seller puts into their asking price.

[porcupine48]

I'm taking CAK under my wing. Like those teen makeover movies. He's going to be boardie of the year material when I'm done with him.

 

You could start with that awful avatar of his.

 

Agreed

 

anyone else with suggestions?

 

Help him set up a second account so he can post while on his vacation.

 

Also help him prepare a curse laden message to Arch for getting the strike.

 

 

Ooh, he can pull a transplant and post a few journals.

 

Shhhhhh...that's my plan if I'm ever bad....

[Broke as a Joke]

It is tough to enforce, but a buyer could now squawk when a seller notes to add 3% if paying by Paypal. Of course, isn't it perfectly ok to state take 3% off the price if paying by check, etc? The seller is technically not adding any value to the item if paid by Paypal, just a discount if using another payment method.

[wombat]

If someone is going to charge an extra 3% they are going to do it one way or another. I really don't care as long I'm good with the total.

[crassus]

If someone is going to charge an extra 3% they are going to do it one way or another. I really don't care as long I'm good with the total.

 

Yes, it is in some sense the same as all hidden costs of business built into a sticker price:

 

Labour

Rent

Utilities

Taxes

...Alimony...Paypal...etc

 

 

 

 

[bababooey]

It is tough to enforce, but a buyer could now squawk when a seller notes to add 3% if paying by Paypal. Of course, isn't it perfectly ok to state take 3% off the price if paying by check, etc? The seller is technically not adding any value to the item if paid by Paypal, just a discount if using another payment method.

They clearly can't dictate terms on other payment options but the rule is designed for the seller to eat fees while the buyer's choice should only be based on which service they use for payment, not price with or without using Paypal's service.

 

Maybe one of the lawyers can chime in on whether that terminology equates "discount on non-Paypal" with "a surcharge for Paypal" but the bottom line to me is that discounting for cash. when chosen by the buyer, is outside their reach whereas a surcharge applied & chosen by the buyer IS within the scope of their terms.

 

[grebal]

Ten years ago when I sold comics on ebay I used the exact approach suggested by Broke as a Joke.

 

Exactly as he said, I gave a 3% discount for checks, and a few buyers took advantage of it (maybe ten per cent of buyers, particularly on larger amounts).

 

Either nobody turned me in or complained to ebay, or I was too small time for them to care (maybe 800 auction over 18 mos) but they didn't just swoop in and cancel all my auctions (as they had done in the past because I'd mentioned "esnipe" or something, I forget, I broke one of their rules and 20-40 auctions just disappeared into cyber-ether).

 

Re: the 3% cash discount, I happened to be a lawyer, but I thought I was just being clever, not lawyerly. ; )

[Columbia Comics]

I've noticed That many sellers, esp new sellers, are adding the 3% to the price.

 

That's well and good and they're welcome to do so but they will lose my business and I know many others on here feel the same way

 

The PayPal fee is the cost of doing business. You wanna pass that along, bake it into the price. Adding another fee is a slap in the face IMO.

[thehumantorch]

I've noticed That many sellers, esp new sellers, are adding the 3% to the price.

 

That's well and good and they're welcome to do so but they will lose my business and I know many others on here feel the same way

 

The PayPal fee is the cost of doing business. You wanna pass that along, bake it into the price. Adding another fee is a slap in the face IMO.

 

Agreed. I click out of the thread if they state 3% extra if you pay by paypal or 3% discount if you pay by other means.

[grebal]

I used to offer free shipping, but you never seem to come out ahead with that customer friendly policy. In future if I list I'll go back to adding reasonable shipping costs w/combined savings etc.

 

I'll also probably add back the old policy of 3 per cent discount for payment w check since that's a customer friendly offer of a discount that doesn't help the seller at all.

 

I get why some buyers might click out feeling they aren't on an even playing field with other bidders, but I think most will appreciate the option to save a few bucks or won't care.

[revat]

I used to offer free shipping, but you never seem to come out ahead with that customer friendly policy. In future if I list I'll go back to adding reasonable shipping costs w/combined savings etc.

 

I'll also probably add back the old policy of 3 per cent discount for payment w check since that's a customer friendly offer of a discount that doesn't help the seller at all.

 

I get why some buyers might click out feeling they aren't on an even playing field with other bidders, but I think most will appreciate the option to save a few bucks or won't care.

 

Here's the thing, no one ever clicked out of a thread because there's one price for all. But SOME people pass on threads because of the +- 3% for PP fees. Of course you MIGHT get more sales as a result...but is it more than the potential sales you lost? I guess each individual seller decides which they thinks happens more, and assumes the risk. But now knowing that its explicitly against a policy of a company who's service you're using....

[grebal]

The ebay policy is pretty clearly 'no surcharge for PP fees,' and ebay might go back to enforcing it, or only when someone reports the listing, or some combination depending on how prevalent it becomes.

 

But the current policy pretty clearly has no problem with cash discount. But your point on buyer criteria is well taken. [if I adopt the policy I will omit from auction and only offer it at checkout, to avoid alienating potential bidders.]

[Dick Pontoon]

I'm taking CAK under my wing. Like those teen makeover movies. He's going to be boardie of the year material when I'm done with him.

 

You could start with that awful avatar of his.

 

Agreed

 

anyone else with suggestions?

 

Help him set up a second account so he can post while on his vacation.

 

Also help him prepare a curse laden message to Arch for getting the strike.

 

 

Ooh, he can pull a transplant and post a few journals.

 

 

He's been posting away across the street.

 

I'm looking forward to his eventual meeting with Stu.

[Sqeggs]

I've noticed That many sellers, esp new sellers, are adding the 3% to the price.

 

That's well and good and they're welcome to do so but they will lose my business and I know many others on here feel the same way

 

The PayPal fee is the cost of doing business. You wanna pass that along, bake it into the price. Adding another fee is a slap in the face IMO.

 

And, apparently, a violation of PP's TOS.