Suspicious Activity between Buyer/Post Office?
Summary: tylestei23 sold an item that was lost in transit and both they and the buyer were reimbursed. Later, the item was unexpectedly delivered, leading to questions about ownership and potential nefarious activity. eoma689485 suggested that since tylestei23 was reimbursed, the item is now the post office's responsibility. Other participants, including tobaccocardyahoo and christworks, discussed the process of filing claims and clarified that such delays are often not due to suspicious activity. tylestei23 acknowledged the learning experience and sought community input on whether the transaction seemed suspicious or was simply unlucky.
I sold an item on 6/5/2026. Upon completing the sale, the buyer reached out and asked me to alert them when I ship the card as they like to inform their mail carrier when they are expecting packages via eBay; I had no problem providing that communication.
On 6/13/2026, the item's tracking updated to "Out for Delivery", but the item never arrived. The buyer reached out with contact info for their local post office and stated the local post office could not find the item and that I could reach out to be told that.
Due to this, the buyer opened up a case on the missing item with eBay. During the investigation, I filed a "Missing Mail Search" with USPS and ultimately a claim to be reimbursed for the value of the lost item. Within the missing mail search, I asked that if the item was found, that it be sent back to myself as I expected eBay to refund the buyer.
The buyer was ultimately refunded and I was reimbursed so no harm done outside of the card remaining lost. On 7/24/2026, the tracking suddenly updated that the item was delivered (on 7/24) and placed in the buyer's mailbox. This led to me contacting USPS to inquire why the item was not sent back to me once found. The customer service rep mentioned that missing mail searches are resolved when items make it to their "lost and found" and that this clearly did not make it there or my missing mail search would have been fulfilled with the item being sent back to me.
In a perfect world, I would get my item back as the buyer should not have received it free of charge. The buyer now got the item without paying for it - what stops this practice from continuing to happen if indeed nefarious activity is going on?
christworks
·1 week ago@tylestei23 eBay does not refund anybody. You, the seller, do. If you did not respond to the INR, then eBay refunded the buyer from your funds and you got a strike on your account for them having to do your job for you. If that's what happened, then I would not say there was no harm was done.
Nothing sinister happened here. 98% of the time mail is not lost. It is simply delayed due to a variety of reasons, and sitting in a sorting warehouse waiting to be picked up. In this case you had an "out for delivery" scan that lines up with when it should have been delivered. It could have been a misscan, and the item was still 100 miles away from your buyer. Or, if we are talking an envelope, it could have fallen in the mail truck, maybe up under the seat, and was found later. I doubt it. I think it was a misscan and never lost.
When you filed your missing mail search, USPS looked at it and knew it was on the way to your buyer. It was merely delayed. things can be delayed for weeks. They are not considered lost. They aren't going to pull delayed mail and send it back to you unless you pay for a package intercept. You didn't do that. If it had actually been lost and was discovered later, then yes, they would have sent it back to you. They do not do that when there it is simply a delay, which was the case here.
That doesn't mean the buyer should not have been reinbursed. If you used eBay Standard Envelope, you are protected by eBay. You file a claim through eBay to get reinbursed after you have refunded the buyer. You'd only file through USPS if you sent the card as a package. Either way you are the one who refunds the buyer, not eBay.
tylestei23
OP1 week ago · EditedThis is super insightful so thank you for the comment! This was my first time having an item fail to be delivered; the package was not sent ESE. I was unaware of the process and I did have trouble finding concrete advice on how to proceed. The eBay AI assistant suggested waiting as the mail might not have been truly lost (which seems to be the case) and that I could wait for eBay to step in for a resolution. This led to frustrations from the buyer since I would not issue the refund but I was not sure if I would be relinquishing my ability to be made whole if I refunded the buyer right away. It was, and apparently still is, a learning process for me, but I will be better prepared next time.
I'm mostly posing the questions of 1) could any of this activity be suspicious, and 2) if it is, why should the buyer receive the card free of charge in the end? If the community feels this was a normal, but unlucky transaction, then that is enough closure for me.
christworks
·1 week ago@tylestei23 If you sent it using USPS Ground Advantage and you bought the label from eBay, had you refunded the buyer when the INR was opened, eBay would have refunded you once it got delivered. At the same time, you could have still filed for the lost package as you did.
I'm sorry that you listened to the AI and that it made it seem like letting eBay step in was the correct thing. I would not depend on AI - whether eBay's, ChatGPT, Gemini, or another one - to tell me the truth in context. It just cannot do that with any degree of accuracy a lot of the time.
Generally, you never want eBay to step in, especially on INRs. That is almost always the case for returns as well.
As far as why should the buyer get the item for free, it may help to look at it throught he lens of eBay and the carrier, in this case USPS, being two seperate entities. The responsibility eBay gives sellers has nothing to do with USPS. eBay's goal is to ensure their buyer is happy, and that they have their item within the stated delivery window or they are fully refunded.
USPS has a rigid timeline for when they consider a package lost for insurance claims. Sometimes they are not actually lost. That's how you were able to get refunded. USPS will still deliver the package if it is deliverable. If the package had been damaged or the label had come off, then it would get sent to be processed as a lost item.
Technically USPS can invoice you for reimbursement of the claim they paid you when the item shows it was eventually delivered. A lot of people do not realize that. The good news is they rarely ever audit and do that. Typically the payout claim would have to be quite high. If the claim is limited to the standard $100 insurance that comes with Ground Advantage, they won't invoice and there is nothing for you to do.
tobaccocardyahoo
·1 week agoWas this one of your cheapie cards shipped by ESE?
The history suggests it was. ESE is a flawed tracking method and nothing untoward need have occurred in order to experience what you experienced.
If you were reimbursed by Ebay's insurer PIP? you have no more right to the card than the buyer does;
tylestei23
OP1 week agoThe item was not shipped ESE so I was reimbursed via USPS.
If we assume nothing nefarious happened, then I agree that I have no extra right to the card than the buyer does.
I'm mostly posing the questions of 1) could any of this activity be suspicious, and 2) if it is, why should the buyer receive the card free of charge in the end? If the community feels this was a normal, but unlucky transaction, then that is enough closure for me.
eoma689485
·1 week ago"The buyer was ultimately refunded and I was reimbursed"
You were reimbursed - so the Post Office took ownership of the card, and if they delivered it to the buyer - the buyer lucked out.
Why do you believe, after being reimbursed, that you should get the card back?
tylestei23
OP1 week agoI had not looked at it this way as far as the PO taking ownership; that is a great perspective on how to look at this.
In the event that there was suspicious activity in this scenario (I know I'm implying there may have been but I'm more so seeing if the community thinks it could be suspicious), then I don't believe the buyer should receive the card at no cost to them. But I do agree that since I was made whole, I should not necessarily be entitled to the card either.
I know I tried my best to make things right, and it would make the experience all the more frustrating if the buyer's activity was indeed nefarious and essentially received the card free of charge.