Buyer returns item the way it was not agreed upon,I payed fees for it,now he's not answering me

[zrenjanin-srb]

This is the case:

Buyer from USA wants to return sticker album.

Since I don't know Post system in USA,I asked him for help (he claimed that stickers in the album are not original,so I need to pay for returning shipping).Then he sends it as "Priority Mail International with insurance and tracking".He just informed me (AFTER sending) that he sent it like that.It comes here,I need to pay 68-69 dollars for custom fees.I told him about that,he reamained silence since then.After that eBay gave him full refund.

As he doesn't answer me,I started to look for help.

I read here:

https://www.ebay.com/help/buying/returns-refunds/start-return/return-postage?id=4066

this:

"When you want to return an item using alternative shipping arrangements, and the seller is responsible for the return shipping charges, you must work with the seller to agree on the shipping service and cost before returning the item."

This "Priority Mail International with insurance" is alternative shipping arrangement.

The buyer didn't wait to agree with me on this,but sent it straight away,without agreement.I didn't know what awaits me (custom fees),util it came here.When I asked him - was it the only way of sending,he said it was the only option.

Later I found out (since,as I told you,I don't know Post system in USA) that there is another way,called "First Class International".It too have tracking of shipment (like Priority Mail),but it is not eligible for custom fees.That method buyer never told me about.Even more,seems like he "hided" it from me (since he's from USA,experienced buyer and seller - has 850 feedback score - I think he knew for that option,but remained silent).

From all this,I would say that the buyer used my lack of knowledge of both USA Post system (that there was another option for trackable shipment) and eBay returning process (that we FIRST must agree on alternative arrangement) to do what he had done.Which directly caused to pay for custom fees - when there was another option available (without extra fees).

The custom fees are non-refundable (I asked here in my post more then once).

I would expect that buyer refund me those fees,since I never really agreed with him to send me that way he did.But he's not replying me anymore.

Is there something I can do?

When I click on options for that item,I only see:

- Contact the buyer

- Sell similar

- Resolve problem

When clicking on "resolve problem" it,after one extra step ("my problem is not listed here"),leads me to knowledge base,where there is no answer for me.Except to call eBay on the phone.

[myangelandmyprincess]

---

@zrenjanin-srb wrote:

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

If the item itself was worth more than $30 not the shipping you would have customs fees.  I'm not sure if your country is one that includes shipping cost int he value but if they do then even with first class shipping the value of the item would then only need to be less than $10 according to your prices.   What was the value of the item?

---

Value of the album was 160 US dollars.

I don't know if it's obligatory to state value of the item you send.When I was sending it was not.Maybe he could do the same.

Even if it is,say,obligatory,with lower shipping (First Class Interntional) and even if there would be fees,it would be less than what he has sent.

All in all - I made for him not to pay any additional fees when receiving the album.But he did not do the same for me,nor consulting me about that.Even if he might have done it.That is not "in good faith".

---

 A value does need to be stated on the customs form.  And again it has nothing to do with what he did vs what you did.  The reason the buyer wasn't charged fees is because items entering the US the value requirement is higher before fees are charged, someone on here says it has to be $800 before it's charged coming into the US.  Your country startes charging customs fees at items with a $30 value.   It's just a difference it the two countries customs policies.

[myangelandmyprincess]

---

@zrenjanin-srb wrote:

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

Considering I couldn’t find if either I don’t find it the least bit strange.  Like I say I found another list and didn’t see your country listed but I figured because of this thread maybe you’d found it somewhere else.  IF the buyer  ran across that page like I did he would have no reason to look for another page thinking that was the answer 

if the buyer thought that was the only way asking you to agree would seems pointless asking if there were fees would seem pointless. And again fees aren’t because of the class of mail.  

And your upset he didn’t know there would be customs fees so along with being upset he didn’t know the shipping options in his country youre upset he didn’t know the customs rules of YOUR country.  Which you don’t even seem to be aware of.  If seems unfair to be upset he doesn’t know his counties info when you don’t know yours either and even more unfair to expect him to know both 

if you had been aware of your customs rules their is the possibility you could have shown evidence it was a return and not merchandise you bought thus not having to pay the fees 

---

I need to clarify this:

I am not upset about him being unaware of all the fees.Either I,nor him,know ALL the details about customs and that stuff (but my guess is that he's more experienced than I am,so he MIGHT have known;but that's another story).But I am upset the way he sent it,without asking me first.And later...well,lying me it was the only option.

When he was sending it the way he wanted (without agreeing me first with that)...well,if I was him,and when I would go to send the album back,I would gather some basic information when I'm already there (in the Post).For example:when it will arrive to destionation country (some "around" time).So that I can inform other side about it,when to expect.Or are some additional fees,both for me or for the one who receives item,involved.Or did I packed/protect item good,considering where it's going.That is,what I consider,"in good faith".

Now,even if he didn't know all the rules,when sending,he could have asked the person who works in the Post about it.I believe that they sure would tell him (they must know all the rules).That's why I said that he could have checked or asked or whatever.I didn't say that he should have known himself all the rules,ofcourse.But to ask/check he could.But he didn't do that.That is not "in good faith".

My guess,when putting all pieces together,is that he went to Post,asked what is the quickest way for him to get money back and sent it like that.Not carring about other side (me).And,along that way,he broke eBay policy about returning the item.

That is what I am upset about.

---

You're assuming way to much.  You're assuming he lied.  Again there is no benefit to the buyer choosing a more expensive method and paying out of their pocket.  So I'm thinking more than likely he really thought it was the only method.  You're assuming he didn't ask at the post office...he might have and the person at the post office may have told him that was the only way to provide tracking to their country.  People post about misinformation received from post office employees...it happens.  The person at the post office may have even known the truth that there was another method if asked but sometimes it's all about the upsale.  I've had post office employees try to convince me I need to send priority instead of first class, to add insurance, etc.  Now of course those are all assumptions of what could have happened too.   The point is you don't know what the buyer did or didn't do in researching how it needed shipped back.  The buyer may have been acting in good faith with what information they had.  They may have thought it was the best, only, or cheapest way to send it back with tracking.

As for not contacting you to agree about the shipping method, as I've mentioned ebay says that in the policy for the buyers own protection because they can't force a seller to refund the shipping costs.  Unfortunately in the dispute itself when it tells the buyer to ship the item back the wording it makes it sound like the buyer should ship back first and then get the seller to reimburse after.  I've seen several buyers come to these boards upset because the way the dispute was worded made them think that sending it back and getting reimbursed later was the proper procedure.  The confusing wording has been pointed out to ebay but they have not yet changed it to indicate the buyer should get the money upfront.  The buyer also if it was asked at the post office about shipping then thought that was the way it needed shipped back went ahead and shipped it while it was there instead of making another trip after contacting you.

[zrenjanin-srb]

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

 A value does need to be stated on the customs form.  And again it has nothing to do with what he did vs what you did.  The reason the buyer wasn't charged fees is because items entering the US the value requirement is higher before fees are charged...

---

Well then,it's exactly why it has something to do with.

If he didn't state the value (+insurance) on the shipment (plus if he had send it as First Class International),I would not have to pay the customs fees.

It was action solely on his decision.

That's why I'm saying that it wasn't in "good faith".

[zrenjanin-srb]

---

@lunalapin1912 wrote:

See?  The information is different when you use different sites.  That's why the OP shouldn't blame his buyer for shipping decisions.

---

So...next time somebody finds some...unofficial web-site,with no accurate data (maybe old,maybe who knows what) and says - "Hey.it written there (at unofficial site) that...blah,blah,blah",while at official site it writes something different...and then person who looks for information at unofficial sites should not be blamed?

Don't you think it's a bad practice?

It would be like "Hey,I read on some...who-knows-what web site that I should not refund buyer when he returns me item" - and then I'm not to be blamed?

Do you see where it goes?

Trusting unofficial websites should not be an excuse.

Like that,everybody could tell "Well,I read there that...(whatever)...and I'm not guilty".

[lunalapin1912]

You should have done your own work if you don't like what your buyer did. Don't blame the buyer, do your own research. Did you see the website I was quoting? It was a shipping franchise.

[zrenjanin-srb]

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

---

@zrenjanin-srb wrote:

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

Considering I couldn’t find if either I don’t find it the least bit strange.  Like I say I found another list and didn’t see your country listed but I figured because of this thread maybe you’d found it somewhere else.  IF the buyer  ran across that page like I did he would have no reason to look for another page thinking that was the answer 

if the buyer thought that was the only way asking you to agree would seems pointless asking if there were fees would seem pointless. And again fees aren’t because of the class of mail.  

And your upset he didn’t know there would be customs fees so along with being upset he didn’t know the shipping options in his country youre upset he didn’t know the customs rules of YOUR country.  Which you don’t even seem to be aware of.  If seems unfair to be upset he doesn’t know his counties info when you don’t know yours either and even more unfair to expect him to know both 

if you had been aware of your customs rules their is the possibility you could have shown evidence it was a return and not merchandise you bought thus not having to pay the fees 

---

I need to clarify this:

I am not upset about him being unaware of all the fees.Either I,nor him,know ALL the details about customs and that stuff (but my guess is that he's more experienced than I am,so he MIGHT have known;but that's another story).But I am upset the way he sent it,without asking me first.And later...well,lying me it was the only option.

When he was sending it the way he wanted (without agreeing me first with that)...well,if I was him,and when I would go to send the album back,I would gather some basic information when I'm already there (in the Post).For example:when it will arrive to destionation country (some "around" time).So that I can inform other side about it,when to expect.Or are some additional fees,both for me or for the one who receives item,involved.Or did I packed/protect item good,considering where it's going.That is,what I consider,"in good faith".

Now,even if he didn't know all the rules,when sending,he could have asked the person who works in the Post about it.I believe that they sure would tell him (they must know all the rules).That's why I said that he could have checked or asked or whatever.I didn't say that he should have known himself all the rules,ofcourse.But to ask/check he could.But he didn't do that.That is not "in good faith".

My guess,when putting all pieces together,is that he went to Post,asked what is the quickest way for him to get money back and sent it like that.Not carring about other side (me).And,along that way,he broke eBay policy about returning the item.

That is what I am upset about.

---

You're assuming way to much.  You're assuming he lied.  Again there is no benefit to the buyer choosing a more expensive method and paying out of their pocket.  So I'm thinking more than likely he really thought it was the only method.  You're assuming he didn't ask at the post office...he might have and the person at the post office may have told him that was the only way to provide tracking to their country.  People post about misinformation received from post office employees...it happens.  The person at the post office may have even known the truth that there was another method if asked but sometimes it's all about the upsale.  I've had post office employees try to convince me I need to send priority instead of first class, to add insurance, etc.  Now of course those are all assumptions of what could have happened too.   The point is you don't know what the buyer did or didn't do in researching how it needed shipped back.  The buyer may have been acting in good faith with what information they had.  They may have thought it was the best, only, or cheapest way to send it back with tracking.

As for not contacting you to agree about the shipping method, as I've mentioned ebay says that in the policy for the buyers own protection because they can't force a seller to refund the shipping costs.  Unfortunately in the dispute itself when it tells the buyer to ship the item back the wording it makes it sound like the buyer should ship back first and then get the seller to reimburse after.  I've seen several buyers come to these boards upset because the way the dispute was worded made them think that sending it back and getting reimbursed later was the proper procedure.  The confusing wording has been pointed out to ebay but they have not yet changed it to indicate the buyer should get the money upfront.  The buyer also if it was asked at the post office about shipping then thought that was the way it needed shipped back went ahead and shipped it while it was there instead of making another trip after contacting you.  

---

I am assuming too much?Hm...

And you're not assuming too much with belief "Well,buyer didn't know"?

Think about that for a moment.

Let's break it down (this yours post).

This will be a long one,probably.

" Again there is no benefit to the buyer choosing a more expensive method and paying out of their pocket. "

There is a benefit.Somebody already meantioned you (quoting you) that with Priority Mail International shipment comes faster to destination (than with First Class International),so he gets refunded (i.e. money back) quicklier.So,there is a benefit.

Ofcourse he expected to be refunded for what he had payed for shipping.That's why he showed me receipt how much did he pay (one of his picture was only focusing on the total sum of payment - why else do you think he would be showing me that?) and like "You need to refund me for that".

"So I'm thinking more than likely he really thought it was the only method."

Then he's either careless or he's lying.Let me explain.There are two options:

1. he looked into...who-knows-where for information,but he didn't look at official website - then he's careless.

2. he did look for official information (on official website),but he did something else - then he's lying.

None of those two is "in good faith".

Plus,even if he thought it was the only option,after I presented him official infromation that it was not...then,if he had good intentions,he would accept his fault - for not looking for official info.Wouldn't you say so?

But he didn't.He just kept silent and asked eBay to refund him,saying that I'm refusing to do so.Which I clearly stated him that it's not the case (ofcourse I will refund him),just I was waiting for his anwer on that subject (that there was another way of sending,with no fees for me).While he kept silent (not answering me).

So,I am waiting for his opinion before I refund him (and I clearly say to him "Tell me what you think about this,before I refund you"),but...instead,I got message from eBay,saying like "Buyer asked us to hop in,blah,blah,so we refunded him on your behalf".

Would anybody say it was "in good faith"?

Next...

"You're assuming he didn't ask at the post office...he might have and the person at the post office may have told him that was the only way to provide tracking to their country.  People post about misinformation received from post office employees...it happens. (etc.)"

Well,basically,yes...I am guessing that he didn't ask,while you're guessing that he asked,but the employee misinformed him (or conviced him to do opposite then he thought).I agree that Priority Mail is more secure and quicker.But again,if the employee misinformed him that it comes with customs fees...then it's serious mistake.

Anyway,we're both guessing what might happen,'cause neither of us knows for sure.

But...

Tell me something.If you were him (buyer)...and if you really have asked or checked all the possibilities for sending...and then other person tells you there was another way...wouldn't you then say "But I checked/asked and that's what they have told me in the Post"?

Or would you,like he did,answer nothing and straight away ask eBay to hop in?

Wouldn't you present that somebody misinformed you or would you rather cut off conversation all of the sudden (until I showed him there was different solution he answered me every single day) and only demand your money back from eBay?Think and be honest about that.

Then...

"...as I've mentioned ebay says that in the policy for the buyers own protection because they can't force a seller to refund the shipping costs. (etc.)"

I didn't read (so far) about buyer's protection.But - he managed to get his refund,simply by asking it from eBay.

I can understand there's a fear of not being able to get refund (as a buyer),but hey,there's eBay and they (almost) always listen to buyers.So,no big deal about it.

Even more,I told him that as soon as I get my album back he will get all refund for it.So,I told him upfront about that.And he didn' say anything that it should be different.

And...

" I've seen several buyers come to these boards upset because the way the dispute was worded made them think that sending it back and getting reimbursed later was the proper procedure. The confusing wording has been pointed out to ebay but they have not yet changed it to indicate the buyer should get the money upfront.  The buyer also if it was asked at the post office about shipping then thought that was the way it needed shipped back went ahead and shipped it while it was there instead of making another trip after contacting you."

I also considered it was the way (buyer returns me first,then he gets refund) - if we both agree first on that.Which we did.I have told him at least twice that he return me the album and he will be refunded and not to worry about that.If he had corrected me on that subject and showed me the eBay rule about that,I would have admited that I didn't know and agreed ofcourse (first refund,then sending the album).I really trusted him at that point (all the way to the point where he started to be silent and not answering me anymore).

But still doesn't justify him (I hope I'm using the right word) to send it the way he has sent it.

[zrenjanin-srb]

---

@lunalapin1912 wrote:
You should have done your own work if you don't like what your buyer did. Don't blame the buyer, do your own research. Did you see the website I was quoting? It was a shipping franchise.

---

Maybe you didn't read all the thread.

I said that I knew nothing about USA Post system and thus asked buyer for a help.Since he's from USA and ofcurse he knows better then I do.I have layed my trust in him.But it seems he has betrayed me.

And you still say that I should not blame the buyer?

Yeah,it seems pretty logical - why trust someone who is from USA and is more experienced than you (he has over 850 marks;I'd say he's been around here for a while) and with whom you have excellent relationship so far?And then,after he fails to warrant (if I'm using the right word) my trust in him,it is not to blame him,but me?Yeah,right...

OK,I know (NOW) that I've been fooled.

But that is not the point here.

I'm not asking about "what to do upfront" (before anything is done),but what to do AFTER it was done.Buyer clearly broke eBay policy and nobody seems to care about it (even eBay).

About the website you quoted...

Man...franchise or not,I believe only official websites (in this case USPS).Trusting anybody else is not legitimate,when the problem/dispute comes.That was my point.

[myangelandmyprincess]

---

@zrenjanin-srb wrote:

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

 A value does need to be stated on the customs form.  And again it has nothing to do with what he did vs what you did.  The reason the buyer wasn't charged fees is because items entering the US the value requirement is higher before fees are charged...

---

Well then,it's exactly why it has something to do with.

If he didn't state the value (+insurance) on the shipment (plus if he had send it as First Class International),I would not have to pay the customs fees.

It was action solely on his decision.

That's why I'm saying that it wasn't in "good faith".

---

again he has to put the value.  And shipping first class has nothing to do with why you were charged.  So no it's not based on something he decided to do that he didn't have to do.   The value had to be declared on the customs form.  And shipping priority over first class would not have meant you didn't have to pay customs fees. 

[myangelandmyprincess]

---

@zrenjanin-srb wrote:

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

---

@zrenjanin-srb wrote:

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

Considering I couldn’t find if either I don’t find it the least bit strange.  Like I say I found another list and didn’t see your country listed but I figured because of this thread maybe you’d found it somewhere else.  IF the buyer  ran across that page like I did he would have no reason to look for another page thinking that was the answer 

if the buyer thought that was the only way asking you to agree would seems pointless asking if there were fees would seem pointless. And again fees aren’t because of the class of mail.  

And your upset he didn’t know there would be customs fees so along with being upset he didn’t know the shipping options in his country youre upset he didn’t know the customs rules of YOUR country.  Which you don’t even seem to be aware of.  If seems unfair to be upset he doesn’t know his counties info when you don’t know yours either and even more unfair to expect him to know both 

if you had been aware of your customs rules their is the possibility you could have shown evidence it was a return and not merchandise you bought thus not having to pay the fees 

---

I need to clarify this:

I am not upset about him being unaware of all the fees.Either I,nor him,know ALL the details about customs and that stuff (but my guess is that he's more experienced than I am,so he MIGHT have known;but that's another story).But I am upset the way he sent it,without asking me first.And later...well,lying me it was the only option.

When he was sending it the way he wanted (without agreeing me first with that)...well,if I was him,and when I would go to send the album back,I would gather some basic information when I'm already there (in the Post).For example:when it will arrive to destionation country (some "around" time).So that I can inform other side about it,when to expect.Or are some additional fees,both for me or for the one who receives item,involved.Or did I packed/protect item good,considering where it's going.That is,what I consider,"in good faith".

Now,even if he didn't know all the rules,when sending,he could have asked the person who works in the Post about it.I believe that they sure would tell him (they must know all the rules).That's why I said that he could have checked or asked or whatever.I didn't say that he should have known himself all the rules,ofcourse.But to ask/check he could.But he didn't do that.That is not "in good faith".

My guess,when putting all pieces together,is that he went to Post,asked what is the quickest way for him to get money back and sent it like that.Not carring about other side (me).And,along that way,he broke eBay policy about returning the item.

That is what I am upset about.

---

You're assuming way to much.  You're assuming he lied.  Again there is no benefit to the buyer choosing a more expensive method and paying out of their pocket.  So I'm thinking more than likely he really thought it was the only method.  You're assuming he didn't ask at the post office...he might have and the person at the post office may have told him that was the only way to provide tracking to their country.  People post about misinformation received from post office employees...it happens.  The person at the post office may have even known the truth that there was another method if asked but sometimes it's all about the upsale.  I've had post office employees try to convince me I need to send priority instead of first class, to add insurance, etc.  Now of course those are all assumptions of what could have happened too.   The point is you don't know what the buyer did or didn't do in researching how it needed shipped back.  The buyer may have been acting in good faith with what information they had.  They may have thought it was the best, only, or cheapest way to send it back with tracking.

As for not contacting you to agree about the shipping method, as I've mentioned ebay says that in the policy for the buyers own protection because they can't force a seller to refund the shipping costs.  Unfortunately in the dispute itself when it tells the buyer to ship the item back the wording it makes it sound like the buyer should ship back first and then get the seller to reimburse after.  I've seen several buyers come to these boards upset because the way the dispute was worded made them think that sending it back and getting reimbursed later was the proper procedure.  The confusing wording has been pointed out to ebay but they have not yet changed it to indicate the buyer should get the money upfront.  The buyer also if it was asked at the post office about shipping then thought that was the way it needed shipped back went ahead and shipped it while it was there instead of making another trip after contacting you.  

---

I am assuming too much?Hm...

And you're not assuming too much with belief "Well,buyer didn't know"?

Think about that for a moment.

Let's break it down (this yours post).

This will be a long one,probably.

" Again there is no benefit to the buyer choosing a more expensive method and paying out of their pocket. "

There is a benefit.Somebody already meantioned you (quoting you) that with Priority Mail International shipment comes faster to destination (than with First Class International),so he gets refunded (i.e. money back) quicklier.So,there is a benefit.

Ofcourse he expected to be refunded for what he had payed for shipping.That's why he showed me receipt how much did he pay (one of his picture was only focusing on the total sum of payment - why else do you think he would be showing me that?) and like "You need to refund me for that".

"So I'm thinking more than likely he really thought it was the only method."

Then he's either careless or he's lying.Let me explain.There are two options:

1. he looked into...who-knows-where for information,but he didn't look at official website - then he's careless.

2. he did look for official information (on official website),but he did something else - then he's lying.

None of those two is "in good faith".

Plus,even if he thought it was the only option,after I presented him official infromation that it was not...then,if he had good intentions,he would accept his fault - for not looking for official info.Wouldn't you say so?

But he didn't.He just kept silent and asked eBay to refund him,saying that I'm refusing to do so.Which I clearly stated him that it's not the case (ofcourse I will refund him),just I was waiting for his anwer on that subject (that there was another way of sending,with no fees for me).While he kept silent (not answering me).

So,I am waiting for his opinion before I refund him (and I clearly say to him "Tell me what you think about this,before I refund you"),but...instead,I got message from eBay,saying like "Buyer asked us to hop in,blah,blah,so we refunded him on your behalf".

Would anybody say it was "in good faith"?

Next...

"You're assuming he didn't ask at the post office...he might have and the person at the post office may have told him that was the only way to provide tracking to their country.  People post about misinformation received from post office employees...it happens. (etc.)"

Well,basically,yes...I am guessing that he didn't ask,while you're guessing that he asked,but the employee misinformed him (or conviced him to do opposite then he thought).I agree that Priority Mail is more secure and quicker.But again,if the employee misinformed him that it comes with customs fees...then it's serious mistake.

Anyway,we're both guessing what might happen,'cause neither of us knows for sure.

But...

Tell me something.If you were him (buyer)...and if you really have asked or checked all the possibilities for sending...and then other person tells you there was another way...wouldn't you then say "But I checked/asked and that's what they have told me in the Post"?

Or would you,like he did,answer nothing and straight away ask eBay to hop in?

Wouldn't you present that somebody misinformed you or would you rather cut off conversation all of the sudden (until I showed him there was different solution he answered me every single day) and only demand your money back from eBay?Think and be honest about that.

Then...

"...as I've mentioned ebay says that in the policy for the buyers own protection because they can't force a seller to refund the shipping costs. (etc.)"

I didn't read (so far) about buyer's protection.But - he managed to get his refund,simply by asking it from eBay.

I can understand there's a fear of not being able to get refund (as a buyer),but hey,there's eBay and they (almost) always listen to buyers.So,no big deal about it.

Even more,I told him that as soon as I get my album back he will get all refund for it.So,I told him upfront about that.And he didn' say anything that it should be different.

And...

" I've seen several buyers come to these boards upset because the way the dispute was worded made them think that sending it back and getting reimbursed later was the proper procedure. The confusing wording has been pointed out to ebay but they have not yet changed it to indicate the buyer should get the money upfront.  The buyer also if it was asked at the post office about shipping then thought that was the way it needed shipped back went ahead and shipped it while it was there instead of making another trip after contacting you."

I also considered it was the way (buyer returns me first,then he gets refund) - if we both agree first on that.Which we did.I have told him at least twice that he return me the album and he will be refunded and not to worry about that.If he had corrected me on that subject and showed me the eBay rule about that,I would have admited that I didn't know and agreed ofcourse (first refund,then sending the album).I really trusted him at that point (all the way to the point where he started to be silent and not answering me anymore).

But still doesn't justify him (I hope I'm using the right word) to send it the way he has sent it.

---

I said I was using assumptions as well.   My point in those assumptions is they are just as logical as yours and because of that you don't know that your assumptions are true.  You're angry at your buyer because of your assumptions but those assumptions arent facts of what the buyer did.  

There is no benefit because the buyer can't assure that you will pay for that shipping cost.  Paying the more expensive way out of pocket  in the hopes you'll pay it back risky.  And clearly the buyer didn't benefit from it because you didn't pay it back.

No no careless if he found the wrong website and thought it was accurate, if he talked to a usps employee and got incorrect info it would be acting in good faith to do those things even if a mistake was made.  I don't find it odd that buyer didn't answer and went ahead and asked ebay to step in

1.  you should have already paid for the return shipping by that point anyhow so buyer may have had a lack of trust

2. your asking  about it instead of refunding would have gave the buyer the idea that you also weren't going to refund the item price willing because of customs fees that the buyer wasn't responsible for since the buyer had sent it back and saw you had it they insured ebay would refund them. 

So Honestly yes I probably would have done the same thing and just escalated it for ebay to decide as it would have looked like you were trying to avoid refunding me...So to me at that point I would have felt as the buyer that you weren't acting in good faith.  I sent it back and already told you it was the only way, you have it back and are now arguing it's not the only way which makes me feel you arent wanting to refund me willingly.

A usps employee giving that wrong information wouldn't surprise me one bit.

the fear isn't the not being able to get a refund.   The part I'm talking about is that the buyer can't get the return shipping cost refunded when they pay it upfront such as your buyer did.  Thats why ebay states to work it out with the seller first in the policies because they can't force the seller to pay the return costs if the buyer pays it out of pocket then tries to get a refund later.  That policy is there for the buyers protection.  Of course as I say unfortuntely the dispute itself makes it seem like the buyer should send it back first and then get the money.

and I can't say enough the way he shipped it is not why you had customs fees.  Since the item was valued over the $30 you would have had fees no matter how it shipped.  the only downside to using priority over first class in this case is the cost of shipping priority is more expensive which hurt his own wallet.  And there is nothing I can find anywhere that states first class vs priority would make a difference so being angry at the buyer for fees that you think occured because of this is unfair.  The buyer had no reason to know or believe that you would be charged fees because of the class of mail they used.  

  Being upset one class of mail is more expensive I would understand but then you just reimburse for the less expensive method of shipping.

Look at this from the buyers side.

buyer gets something they believe is fake/not as described.   They open a case, they pay out of pocket to ship the item back thinking it's the only/cheapest way they can with tracking, they show you the receipt which you don't refund for yet, you get the item back, instead of refunding you send a message complaining about customs fees and the way the item was shipped back...I don't know about you but in the buyers shoes I would feel the seller was trying to avoid refunding me altogether.  I wouldn't sit there and argue back and forth over it with you.  You had the item back I'd escalate and get my refund. 

[ctoos_17]

---

@zrenjanin-srb wrote:

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

 A value does need to be stated on the customs form.  And again it has nothing to do with what he did vs what you did.  The reason the buyer wasn't charged fees is because items entering the US the value requirement is higher before fees are charged...

---

Well then,it's exactly why it has something to do with.

If he didn't state the value (+insurance) on the shipment (plus if he had send it as First Class International),I would not have to pay the customs fees.

It was action solely on his decision.

That's why I'm saying that it wasn't in "good faith".

---

Actually, your customs office probably would have opened the package, assigned their own value to the item, and still held you responsible for the fees.

You're not going to get your desired outcome. It's over, it's done. Vent, rage and cry out to the gods if you like, it's not going to change anything. 

[ctoos_17]

---

@lunalapin1912 wrote:
You should have done your own work if you don't like what your buyer did. Don't blame the buyer, do your own research. Did you see the website I was quoting? It was a shipping franchise.

---

Considering you threw up an outdated link from a "shipping franchise", not the official USPS link, you didn't do the work either

[sam9876]

"If he didn't state the value (+insurance) on the shipment (plus if he had send it as First Class International),I would not have to pay the customs fees"

The value must be stated.

[zrenjanin-srb]

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

---

@zrenjanin-srb wrote:

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

 A value does need to be stated on the customs form.  And again it has nothing to do with what he did vs what you did.  The reason the buyer wasn't charged fees is because items entering the US the value requirement is higher before fees are charged...

---

Well then,it's exactly why it has something to do with.

If he didn't state the value (+insurance) on the shipment (plus if he had send it as First Class International),I would not have to pay the customs fees.

It was action solely on his decision.

That's why I'm saying that it wasn't in "good faith".

---

again he has to put the value.  And shipping first class has nothing to do with why you were charged.  So no it's not based on something he decided to do that he didn't have to do.   The value had to be declared on the customs form.  And shipping priority over first class would not have meant you didn't have to pay customs fees. 

---

Can you clarify a bit more?

Because,i didn't understand you right:once you tell "A value does need to be stated on the customs form." and then "again he has to put the value."?

About shipping,my point is that:even if I would be charged ("charged"=customs fees) for First Class International shipping,it would be less then what is charged (for customs fees) for Priority Mail (based on price difference between the two).So,that practice is not "in good faith".

Plus,when I said "It was action solely on his decision." I mean to put insurance on that shipping.

I'm not an expert,but I believe that adding that (which I didn't ask for) adds more "value" of the shipment and thus more customs fees (which is calculated on that "value").

In that light - yes,it was his decision (which he didn't have to do).

[zrenjanin-srb]

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

I said I was using assumptions as well.   My point in those assumptions is they are just as logical as yours and because of that you don't know that your assumptions are true.  You're angry at your buyer because of your assumptions but those assumptions arent facts of what the buyer did.  

There is no benefit because the buyer can't assure that you will pay for that shipping cost.  Paying the more expensive way out of pocket  in the hopes you'll pay it back risky.  And clearly the buyer didn't benefit from it because you didn't pay it back.

No no careless if he found the wrong website and thought it was accurate, if he talked to a usps employee and got incorrect info it would be acting in good faith to do those things even if a mistake was made.  I don't find it odd that buyer didn't answer and went ahead and asked ebay to step in

1.  you should have already paid for the return shipping by that point anyhow so buyer may have had a lack of trust

2. your asking  about it instead of refunding would have gave the buyer the idea that you also weren't going to refund the item price willing because of customs fees that the buyer wasn't responsible for since the buyer had sent it back and saw you had it they insured ebay would refund them. 

So Honestly yes I probably would have done the same thing and just escalated it for ebay to decide as it would have looked like you were trying to avoid refunding me...So to me at that point I would have felt as the buyer that you weren't acting in good faith.  I sent it back and already told you it was the only way, you have it back and are now arguing it's not the only way which makes me feel you arent wanting to refund me willingly.

A usps employee giving that wrong information wouldn't surprise me one bit.

the fear isn't the not being able to get a refund.   The part I'm talking about is that the buyer can't get the return shipping cost refunded when they pay it upfront such as your buyer did.  Thats why ebay states to work it out with the seller first in the policies because they can't force the seller to pay the return costs if the buyer pays it out of pocket then tries to get a refund later.  That policy is there for the buyers protection.  Of course as I say unfortuntely the dispute itself makes it seem like the buyer should send it back first and then get the money.

and I can't say enough the way he shipped it is not why you had customs fees.  Since the item was valued over the $30 you would have had fees no matter how it shipped.  the only downside to using priority over first class in this case is the cost of shipping priority is more expensive which hurt his own wallet.  And there is nothing I can find anywhere that states first class vs priority would make a difference so being angry at the buyer for fees that you think occured because of this is unfair.  The buyer had no reason to know or believe that you would be charged fees because of the class of mail they used.  

  Being upset one class of mail is more expensive I would understand but then you just reimburse for the less expensive method of shipping.

Look at this from the buyers side.

buyer gets something they believe is fake/not as described.   They open a case, they pay out of pocket to ship the item back thinking it's the only/cheapest way they can with tracking, they show you the receipt which you don't refund for yet, you get the item back, instead of refunding you send a message complaining about customs fees and the way the item was shipped back...I don't know about you but in the buyers shoes I would feel the seller was trying to avoid refunding me altogether.  I wouldn't sit there and argue back and forth over it with you.  You had the item back I'd escalate and get my refund. 

Again,let's break it down.

"You're angry at your buyer because of your assumptions but those assumptions arent facts of what the buyer did."

I am "angry" in the way that the buyer didn't inform upfront what he's doing/what he'll do,so that we could agree before that,and thus broke eBay policy.That is the fact and not the assumption.

The rest (did he asked/checked for another way of shipping and rest) is assumption,yes.But either way,as I already told,it leads him being either careless or lying,however you turn it.

"There is no benefit because the buyer can't assure that you will pay for that shipping cost.  Paying the more expensive way out of pocket  in the hopes you'll pay it back risky.  "

I must clarify this:

Until the point I showed him that there was another way of shipping,I would describe our relationship as very,very good,even more than that.Before that point,there was no single doubt in my mind that he will do the best for me.As I was doing the best for him (initially,it all started of him asking me to lower the price for an item,which I did,and to send it as basic shipment with tracking number).He was answering my messages every single day (in couple of hours),as I was answering his.When he said he wants to return album,I agreed without a question and told him that he would get full refund (as "in good faith" seller should do).

So,saying it was "risky" (in such our relationship) would be as me saying "It's a risky if you go out on the street,because the car might hit you".We trusted each other,our relationship was smooth (I hope I'm using the right word),that is the fact (as for me/the way I saw it).Otherwise,I surely wouldn't lay my trust in him,if there was previously any kind of problem between us.

"No no careless if he found the wrong website and thought it was accurate, if he talked to a usps employee and got incorrect info it would be acting in good faith to do those things even if a mistake was made. "

I could answer only this:

@ctoos_17 wrote:

Considering you threw up an outdated link from a "shipping franchise", not the official USPS link, you didn't do the work either

Relying on to unofficial sources is "not doing the work",at least.So,yes,he was careless,minimum (if such is the case).

Plus,as I have told,if we all relied on who-knows-what sources - do you understand where it leads to?Please,don't defend that view "if somebody was looking into unofficial websites,then he's not guilty".He might be looking at...who knows where,thinking it is OK.But that doesn't free him of being responsible of breaking eBay policy.That is my bottom line.

"I don't find it odd that buyer didn't answer and went ahead and asked ebay to step in

1.  you should have already paid for the return shipping by that point anyhow so buyer may have had a lack of trust

2. your asking  about it instead of refunding would have gave the buyer the idea that you also weren't going to refund the item price willing because of customs fees that the buyer wasn't responsible for since the buyer had sent it back and saw you had it they insured ebay would refund them. 

So Honestly yes I probably would have done the same thing and just escalated it for ebay to decide as it would have looked like you were trying to avoid refunding me..."

1. it was the point I got information that I need to pay extra 69 dollars in order to receive shipment.I still didn't get it/received it (it was till in the Post).It was agreed upon with him,when I get it,he will be refunded.And he agreed ofcourse.So,no need for him to act like that.

2. I am asking him (not demanding anything) what he thinks of it.As he didn't told me anything about it upfront.I simply told him what is the situation and asked for his opinion.I didn't say anything (make judgement) or propose anything.Our relationship in that point was still smooth.Just to hear something from him and he will be refunded.He knew that.As well as I knew that even (in some crazy parallel universe,that does not exist) if I refuse to refund him,eBay or Paypal will surely refund him.We both knew that and there was no need anybody to be upset.

Thinking like that (what you're implying,I think),that "OK,the shipment arrived at his town,he's asking me about my opinion,I will call eBay" is the way "my way or the highway".That is not "in good faith".There should be normal communication all the way.But,from his side...it just disappeared,suddenly.

Wouldn't be OK to tell the seller (at least) "I don't know" (which he even didn't do that)?If you're about to say "No,it would not be OK",then it's "my way or the highway".Which never tends to be good.

"So to me at that point I would have felt as the buyer that you weren't acting in good faith.  I sent it back and already told you it was the only way, you have it back and are now arguing it's not the only way which makes me feel you arent wanting to refund me willingly."

1. I still didn't have it back.In was in the Post.

2. say...if someone does something and makes the damage to the other side,while instead he/she could do it the other way (with no damage or - at least - less damage)...shouldn't other side point on that?With no direct accusation,but just simply layed down information I had.

So,you make a mistake,somebody points out to that,and you feel uncomfortable?Well,after the damage that mistake have made maybe you should feel uncomfortable.Pointing out to other's mistake is not "not doing in good faith".

"A usps employee giving that wrong information wouldn't surprise me one bit."

I really can't tell anything of USPS personnel (as I never met them),but maybe other people here can tell?Are they generally bad?

"The part I'm talking about is that the buyer can't get the return shipping cost refunded when they pay it upfront such as your buyer did. "

He could!I mean,he would!

We had great communication so far,there was no doubt that I will do for him as he would do for me.When he said that he has sent me,you know what my reply was?"Thanks man!".Honestly.I was happy that he helped me to sort out returnig shipment,as I never did it before.

Our relationship was very good,he helped me also,so there's no doubt he would be refunded to the last penny!

If there weren't customs fees involved ofcourse (not by my fault)...

If you're implying,after all that great bond we had,that after receiving shipment I would act like a sh*t and intentionally not refunding him...man,you're so,so far from the truth.Both I and him knew he would be refunded for everything.That's why,I guess,he sent back album first and then expected to be refunded.

"and I can't say enough the way he shipped it is not why you had customs fees.  Since the item was valued over the $30 you would have had fees no matter how it shipped. "

EVEN if it is like that (which I doubt,but OK,that's another story),customs fees involved in First Class International would be less than with Priority Mail with insurance.Simply,if the shipping price is bigger,the fees based on that price are bigger,you can ask anybody about that.

So,even if it's like that,he still made greater damage to me.The point is:the (greater) damage to the other side still exists (while it could be - at least - lesser damage).

"the only downside to using priority over first class in this case is the cost of shipping priority is more expensive which hurt his own wallet.  And there is nothing I can find anywhere that states first class vs priority would make a difference "

1. he would be fully refunded,he knew that.So there's nothing about "it hurts his wallet" (it actually in the end hurted my wallet even more).

2. there is a difference,I told you already (plus,somebody else have told you).The Priority Mail comes faster.First Class,as I sent him,came in 12 working days.Priority came in 9 working days (if we count Saturdays also).So,he gets his money back faster.

Ask somebody from USPS,maybe they can confirm you these numbers,if you don't believe me.

"so being angry at the buyer for fees that you think occured because of this is unfair.  The buyer had no reason to know or believe that you would be charged fees because of the class of mail they used. "

1. it's not that I "think fess occured",they are occured.Do I need to post a picture which shows that I payed for them?

2. buyer had no reason to know?OK,again:he must have known some way possible to send it back to me.He found one.And again:

- if he got that one way from unofficial source - he's careless.

- if he got from official source,without asking anything further - again,he's careless.

- if he got from official source,with empleyee telling him wrong - possible ofcourse...but again - wouldn't you then tell "So I was told"?Wouldn't that be logical instead of keeping silent?

- if he got from official source,with employee telling him right,but he's not telling me - that's lying to me.

(by the way,trusting that out of 4 possibilities only 1 is correct,not paying attention to other 3...seems to be OK?)

"Being upset one class of mail is more expensive I would understand but then you just reimburse for the less expensive method of shipping."

That is no problem - I already told so.

I was just waiting for his opinion,and he would be refunded.

"Look at this from the buyers side.

buyer gets something they believe is fake/not as described.   They open a case, they pay out of pocket to ship the item back thinking it's the only/cheapest way they can with tracking, they show you the receipt which you don't refund for yet, you get the item back, instead of refunding you send a message complaining about customs fees and the way the item was shipped back...I don't know about you but in the buyers shoes I would feel the seller was trying to avoid refunding me altogether.  I wouldn't sit there and argue back and forth over it with you.  You had the item back I'd escalate and get my refund. "

OK,and I tell you - look from this side:

He (buyer) goes to Post,asks how he can return item and get money back fastes,he does like that (knowing he will be refunded for it),when other side informs him that he (I actually) still didn't get in hands that item,but that there are some fees involved,he just keeps silent,not carring about anything...should you still continue to trust him?Well,I don't know about you,but I would feel uncomortable - at that point - to trust someone like that.He did something on his own,I got in trouble because of it,then he doesn't say anything...and I still need to trust him?

You say:"I wouldn't sit there and argue back and forth over it with you. "

I was not looking for an argue/fight.As I said,I simply laid down the facts and asked for his opinion.I didn't made demands,I didn't made judgements,I didn't propose anything.I simply asked him "What do you think about it?".

If somebody presents you some facts and asks you "What do you think?" (again,without judgement,demand or proposal) and you see it as a call to argue/fight...well,it seems like you're seeing something that not many people see.

Also "You had the item back I'd escalate and get my refund."

I got my item back - the way I didn't wanted,nor asked for that exact way (aside that it was still not in my hands).

And no matter to that,you would escalate for refund.More and more it's like "my way or the highway".Which tends to be oppossite of "in good faith".

[myangelandmyprincess]

---

@zrenjanin-srb wrote:

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

---

@zrenjanin-srb wrote:

---

@myangelandmyprincess wrote:

 A value does need to be stated on the customs form.  And again it has nothing to do with what he did vs what you did.  The reason the buyer wasn't charged fees is because items entering the US the value requirement is higher before fees are charged...

---

Well then,it's exactly why it has something to do with.

If he didn't state the value (+insurance) on the shipment (plus if he had send it as First Class International),I would not have to pay the customs fees.

It was action solely on his decision.

That's why I'm saying that it wasn't in "good faith".

---

again he has to put the value.  And shipping first class has nothing to do with why you were charged.  So no it's not based on something he decided to do that he didn't have to do.   The value had to be declared on the customs form.  And shipping priority over first class would not have meant you didn't have to pay customs fees. 

---

Can you clarify a bit more?

Because,i didn't understand you right:once you tell "A value does need to be stated on the customs form." and then "again he has to put the value."?

About shipping,my point is that:even if I would be charged ("charged"=customs fees) for First Class International shipping,it would be less then what is charged (for customs fees) for Priority Mail (based on price difference between the two).So,that practice is not "in good faith".

Plus,when I said "It was action solely on his decision." I mean to put insurance on that shipping.

I'm not an expert,but I believe that adding that (which I didn't ask for) adds more "value" of the shipment and thus more customs fees (which is calculated on that "value").

In that light - yes,it was his decision (which he didn't have to do).

---

Insurance shouldn’t really add to the value and priority automatically comes with some insurance.  

When I say the value must be stated I mean that the buyer hasn’t to put the item cost on the customs form.