What Would You Do?

[doc-holmes]

I'd like to preface this by saying the money is not an issue. It's such a small amount, I really don't care. I was just surprised by the seller's response and I'm wondering if you think this is fair. This is more of a sociological experiment for me. 

I purchased a hockey card for $5.50 with $3.50 shipping, from US to Canada. It arrived yesterday but the envelope was sliced open and the card had been stolen. It wasn't even in one of those baggies with a "sorry about your luck" note or anything. Just an empty envelope.

I contacted the seller of course, asking for a refund. The seller's take is we have basically both been ripped off, and he offered to refund the card price but not the shipping. I know technically I can open a case (INAD, I think, something was technically received) and get refunded in full, but I'm unsure I want to make a stink over $3.50. But...there's also a part of me that is mildly annoyed the seller is trying to nickel and dime his way out of a full refund he's technically supposed to give. 

Thoughts? 

[pjcdn2005]

For me it isn't common sense for a buyer to pay postage for something that they didn't receive.

[astralcloud]

Personally, as a newish seller to eBay, I would request the full refund.

As a buyer your job is to look for items and order them. If they don't arrive, then that is on the seller. I would recommend requesting a full refund and tell the seller to better package the cards going forward. The sellers are the ones who face the risk, and you shouldn't have to pay for something that never arrived. Forr all we know the item could have fallen out during delivery. The seller can submit a freight claim or a claim with eBay to recover shipping charges on their end if they really want to get the $3-4 back. 

Again, I am a new seller. If I had a buyer not receive an item, then I wouldn't be trying to squeeze shipping out of them. It's already been a terrible experience for the buyer, and at that point the seller needs to try to make it better for all involved by quickly resolving. No product = No charge. Simple. 

I will say I wish all buyers were as thoughtful as you are though. Hope this helps from a newbie on eBay. 

[yuzuha]

---

@soh.maryl wrote:

Somehow I thought that the post office would have noticed this.  When, a long time ago, I received a package that had been opened and the contents removed (not an eBay purchase), the empty package was enclosed in a zip lock bag and it had a stamped message about the package being empty when received.  

---

They don't always if it isn't immediately obvious. A padded envelope with a gaping hole in one end, sure. A plain letter envelope that ripped open along one seam? That's pretty easy to overlook.

[d-k_treasures]

---

@monster-deals wrote:

---

@divwido wrote:

But you don't know that.  Maybe the kid down the street was looking through mail boxes.

I've had my mail and packages stolen.  That wasn't the sellers fault that some jerk took our mail.  it was delivered-their job was done.  that was my fault for not replacing the stupid unlocked mail box. 

I'm just asking for a little common sense.  I know, how stupid.

---

It doesn't matter who, how, why or where.

It is 100% the sellers responsibility and always will be.

Where is your common sense on this one? Seriously this is day one stuff here.

---

Responsible for delivery. But not responsible for anything that happens to the package AFTER delivery(other than not as described).

And  just how would the seller know that this happened in transit vs. someone who took  it out of the mailbox(after delivery) or someone else in the household took it out(again, after delivery).

Even if it WAS opened in transit - without a note from the PO, no one can be sure.

If a buyer came here and just said a box was opened while it was on their porch, and items taken from it, and had sent the seller a photo of an open box on the porch, everyone here would say 'porch pirate' and that the seller had done their job.

[reallynicestamps]

@maxine*j 

I don't know Canadian law, but in the U.S. the seller is  responsible,  whether or not the seller is to blame. 

The law here is the same.

But the point is not "law" the point is how to prevent reoccurence.

And reporting the problem to the postmaster and the police might lead to better policing.

The odd thing to me is not that the bubble envelopes were undisturbed, but that the carrier delivered an opened empty envelope. 

[maxine*j]

---

@reallynicestamps wrote:

@maxine*j 

I don't know Canadian law, but in the U.S. the seller is  responsible,  whether or not the seller is to blame. 

The law here is the same.

But the point is not "law" the point is how to prevent reoccurence.

And reporting the problem to the postmaster and the police might lead to better policing.

The odd thing to me is not that the bubble envelopes were undisturbed, but that the carrier delivered an opened empty envelope. 

---

@reallynicestamps 

Ah, sorry.  I missed your point the first time.  And it is an interesting point:  In this case, did the seller fulfill his responsibility because delivery was completed, and the goods were stolen after delivery?   Or were the goods stolen before delivery. while still in the hands of the carrier, which makes it the seller's responsibility?

-

[reallynicestamps]

Or were the goods stolen before delivery. while still in the hands of the carrier, which makes it the seller's responsibility?

And while this is not the seller's fault, it is his responsibility.

However, the carrier is responsible to the seller, who is the carrier's employer.

[maxine*j]

---

@reallynicestamps wrote:

Or were the goods stolen before delivery. while still in the hands of the carrier, which makes it the seller's responsibility?

And while this is not the seller's fault, it is his responsibility.

However, the carrier is responsible to the seller, who is the carrier's employer.

---

Exactly.   Although what seller would go to all the hassle of filing a postal claim over something this inexpensive?    Still, this is an interesting one, to me, because I've never run across a situation where it was unclear whether the theft / damage took place before or after delivery to the customer.

[gosimus]

@doc-holmes 

< arrived yesterday but the envelope was sliced open ... [seller] offered to refund the card price but not the shipping >    

I never could resist a sociable experiment.  Since the package arrived – albeit damaged and empty – the seller is not at fault unless you'd want to make an argument for insufficient packaging.  I think such an argument would be specious.  The seller's offer to refund the purchase price is a good compromise.  Yes, you could claim Not As Described and get it all refunded, but in my humble opinion 3.50 wouldn't be worth the ding to my karma.