Possible INR coming my way -- FedEx redirect Scam?

[powertell]

I need some advice. I'm wondering if I just got hit with a scam and if I'm gonna lose my money after sending the product via FedEx Shipping on Ebay. 

I sold a video card for around $1,000. Printed a FedEx label using Ebay's shipping and I made sure signature was required since the purchase was over $750 and I wanted to make sure I would be covered by seller protection. 

Now here's what happened that has suddenly made me concerned. I tracked the package which was sent to Florida and I find out it was redirected to New Jersey (?) and delivered there. 

I called FedEx to find out why the package was redirected because I did not authorize this and I did not see any options to prevent this. FedEx said the recipient's party called and they were able to redirect the shipment and paid for the shipping changes with their account. FedEx would not provide me with the delivery address or the account used to pay for the redirecting of the shipment, they said that information was private (?). 

Any thoughts or help would be appreciated. Since the package was delivered today I'm concerned that I will be dealing with some sort of chargeback through paypal or ebay in the near future.

[berserkerplanet]

•Anyone using Fed Ex here should •have their own Fed Ex account
•linked so that there is some control.

In general that is true, but I don't think would make any difference here as there is no provision I'm aware of to prohibit redirects.

(arguing about it with FedEx might be easier through one's own account, but end result would be the same unless that "shipper authorization" clause in the FDM terms actually has teeth)

That FDM recipient thing is an abomination.

[berserkerplanet]

Glad you prevailed.

(PayPal and eBay accidentally do the right thing once in a while)

So what do you feel is the summarized takeaway on this?

That PayPal agreed that as required, all you had to do was show proof of shipping for an unauthorized dispute?

Or that for some unfathomable reason, they were applying INR "must show delivery to PayPal transaction address" criteria to a UID, but that the redirect did not invalidate your seller protections for even that higher (incorrectly applied) proof standard?

Or that the sig conf was the issue due to transaction amount over $750, but for some reason, the redirect invalidated that requirement, even though you did not obtain a sig from recipient at PayPal transaction address?

Or you just got lucky?

Could be important for other FedEx shippers going forward, especially as this FDM recipient redirect thing gains traction, and especially if scammers focus on it as a loophole, especially for INR disputes where delivery address is relevent.

[dtexley3]

---

@berserkerplanetwrote:
Glad you prevailed.

(PayPal and eBay accidentally do the right thing once in a while)

So what do you feel is the summarized takeaway on this?

That PayPal agreed that as required, all you had to do was show proof of shipping for an unauthorized dispute?

Or that for some unfathomable reason, they were applying INR "must show delivery to PayPal transaction address" criteria to a UID, but that the redirect did not invalidate your seller protections for even that higher (incorrectly applied) proof standard?

Or that the sig conf was the issue due to transaction amount over $750, but for some reason, the redirect invalidated that requirement, even though you did not obtain a sig from recipient at PayPal transaction address?

Or you just got lucky?

Could be important for other FedEx shippers going forward, especially as this FDM recipient redirect thing gains traction, and especially if scammers focus on it as a loophole, especially for INR disputes where delivery address is relevent.

---

Agree totally on the statement above.

I think the deciding factor here was this was not an INR case but a UT case.  Paypal is fairly clear that on a UT case you only have to show you shipped the item using the address on the order.

[berserkerplanet]

I guess sig conf isn't in play for a UT dispute, but if it were INR, the sig conf plus redirect complicates things.

Buyer argument could be "someone else in another state signed for it not me", and I don't know how PayPal would rule.

It looks like there is a gaping hole in that PayPal seller protection exclusions clause that never forsaw buyer redirection of seller shipments (only consideres wholly buyer controlled shipments).

It is concerning, but I see no absolute solution other than to not ship via FedEx which isn't going to happen until it bites me hard if at all (but probably for any higher value shipments beginning now)

I think the upcoming PayPal "no seller UT protection if buyer doesn't log in to a PayPal account (which means straight CC and guest checkouts?) is a much scarier prospect unless I totally misunderstood that.

That sounds like total open season on sellers.

[cycle-dog]

Great news, and happy for you.

They got it “right” and so very quickly resolved as well – how wonderful. (As to “why”, it’s because it's the law! 😉 ).

Meantime, anyone else notice the recent updates that PayPal just released, including the addition of more details and explanations when it comes to seller protection coverage, etc.? (If you haven’t already done so, check it out -- a good start, and seemingly good news all-around).

[lookng2015]

As far as the Fedex recipient redirect thing, it only works if the buyer LIES and claims they have "permission" from the seller to redirect.

That's up to Fedex to enforce.

[banana*shoe*boutique]

@powertell

Great news!  So happy for you!