<< <i>Zenny in my case I am the one who did not get the coin I had ins and the guy negs me first you think this is right, again I bought ins never got coin or refund just got a neg for my bid. >>
No, i never said i thought it was right in your case, all i was saying was that THIS case is a slam dunk, end of discussion.
<< <i>Zenny in my case I am the one who did not get the coin I had ins and the guy negs me first you think this is right, again I bought ins never got coin or refund just got a neg for my bid. >>
No, i never said i thought it was right in your case, all i was saying was that THIS case is a slam dunk, end of discussion. >>
Slam dunk or not, it doesn't make the case right.
Unless the packaging was terrible, there is no reason that a claim should be filed on ETHICAL grounds. The seller did what was asked, and the buyer is exploiting the rules for a terribly unfair advantage. I recently had some slabs that were heavily insured and sent a way they'd been sent to me numerous times before. For some reason, the non-machineable package went through a machine and the slabs cracked. If the package weren't insured, it would have been MY fault; the coins were packaged securely, and proof of mailing and delivery (although not "complete") was there. In this case, we know the coin was mailed, and if the seller didn't package poorly, it was the buyer's fault for not paying insurance.
I found out the hard way about the Post Office, once they figured out what I was mailing I had a few packages come up missing, I use to just hand them to the clerk or drop them in the box, now I have the clerk scan them in as accepted (I use paypal to print the labels) this does three things, 1, it proves that I dropped the item at the post office to be mailed, 2, it shows on the delivery confirmation link that it was accepted, 3, I get a print out of the exact weight of the package I send with all the confirmation information. I self insure small orders, if someone buy's insurance then that's better for me. But since I have had each package scanned in as accepted I havent lost one nor has anything been missing from my packages.
On BS&T Now: Nothing. Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up! Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
BTW, does the seller use a return address like "John's Super-valuable Coins" ?
--Jerry >>
Funny you would mention this. I bought a rather scarce militaria item on eBay from a fellow in Holland a few years ago and a empty heavily padded envelope arrived. His company name in the return section was " Pot Militaria. " How could anyone have resisted opening it. The post office could do nothing but after constant hounding the fellow in Holland sent me my money back.
Unless the packaging was terrible, there is no reason that a claim should be filed on ETHICAL grounds. The seller did what was asked, and the buyer is exploiting the rules for a terribly unfair advantage. I recently had some slabs that were heavily insured and sent a way they'd been sent to me numerous times before. For some reason, the non-machineable package went through a machine and the slabs cracked. If the package weren't insured, it would have been MY fault; the coins were packaged securely, and proof of mailing and delivery (although not "complete") was there. In this case, we know the coin was mailed, and if the seller didn't package poorly, it was the buyer's fault for not paying insurance.
ReleaseTheHounds, what's your eBay ID? >>
I still disagree. It's the seller's obligation to see that the package is delivered. What's unethical about receiving a package marked "EMPTY UPON RECEIPT BY POST OFFICE" and wanting your money back?
Insurance or lack thereof has nothing to do with the fact that the buyer did not receive what he paid for.
You even state in your case that "(i)f the package weren't insured, it would have been MY fault."
<< <i>You even state in your case that "(i)f the package weren't insured, it would have been MY fault." >>
Yes, I was receiving the package.
I know what the rules are, but I have ethics, too. This is why I buy insurance or insure everything coming to me, and I save my butt by insuring everything that goes out. I know what to do, but in some situations, I don't agree with the "right" response.
It's my belief that those blue insurance stickers and high postage amounts attract postal thieves. I use online Click and Ship for shipping coins in priority boxes. I print the labels and attach them with a glue stick. It cost $4.05 with free tracking and doesn't attract attention and I simply drop it in the mail collection box accross the street. I am also careful to pack the boxes tight with peanuts so nothing rattles. Haven't lost anything since I started. However, I wouldn't do this with it items valued at over $250 and Paypal payment.
I understand your admirable stance that it is the buyers responsibility to purchase insurance, just don't believe that a seller's duty to deliver should be routinely and abjectly tranferred to a buyer.
Better than in most cases, there is almost de facto proof of some sort of packaging error, as there is incontrovertible evidence that the package in this particular instance did not make it intact to within 200 miles of it's destination.
hey, cool, I didn't have to write good grief this time.....
Comments
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>Zenny in my case I am the one who did not get the coin I had ins and the guy negs me first you think this is right, again I bought ins never got coin or refund just got a neg for my bid. >>
No, i never said i thought it was right in your case, all i was saying was that THIS case is a slam dunk, end of discussion.
<< <i>
<< <i>Zenny in my case I am the one who did not get the coin I had ins and the guy negs me first you think this is right, again I bought ins never got coin or refund just got a neg for my bid. >>
No, i never said i thought it was right in your case, all i was saying was that THIS case is a slam dunk, end of discussion. >>
Slam dunk or not, it doesn't make the case right.
Unless the packaging was terrible, there is no reason that a claim should be filed on ETHICAL grounds. The seller did what was asked, and the buyer is exploiting the rules for a terribly unfair advantage. I recently had some slabs that were heavily insured and sent a way they'd been sent to me numerous times before. For some reason, the non-machineable package went through a machine and the slabs cracked. If the package weren't insured, it would have been MY fault; the coins were packaged securely, and proof of mailing and delivery (although not "complete") was there. In this case, we know the coin was mailed, and if the seller didn't package poorly, it was the buyer's fault for not paying insurance.
ReleaseTheHounds, what's your eBay ID?
Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up!
Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
<< <i>
BTW, does the seller use a return address like "John's Super-valuable Coins" ?
--Jerry >>
Funny you would mention this. I bought a rather scarce militaria item on eBay from a fellow in Holland a few years ago and a empty heavily padded envelope arrived.
His company name in the return section was " Pot Militaria. " How could anyone have resisted opening it. The post office could do nothing but after constant hounding the fellow in Holland sent me my money back.
Chance favors the prepared mind.
<< <i>
Unless the packaging was terrible, there is no reason that a claim should be filed on ETHICAL grounds. The seller did what was asked, and the buyer is exploiting the rules for a terribly unfair advantage. I recently had some slabs that were heavily insured and sent a way they'd been sent to me numerous times before. For some reason, the non-machineable package went through a machine and the slabs cracked. If the package weren't insured, it would have been MY fault; the coins were packaged securely, and proof of mailing and delivery (although not "complete") was there. In this case, we know the coin was mailed, and if the seller didn't package poorly, it was the buyer's fault for not paying insurance.
ReleaseTheHounds, what's your eBay ID? >>
I still disagree. It's the seller's obligation to see that the package is delivered. What's unethical about receiving a package marked "EMPTY UPON RECEIPT BY POST OFFICE" and wanting your money back?
Insurance or lack thereof has nothing to do with the fact that the buyer did not receive what he paid for.
You even state in your case that "(i)f the package weren't insured, it would have been MY fault."
I think for the third time, good grief......
Insurance protects the SELLER.
z
<< <i> I did not purchase insurance for the item as I understand it is the seller's responsibility to deliver the goods in tact. >>
Those are the rules of the game. Some dumbass dealers think the rules don't apply to them though.
<< <i>You even state in your case that "(i)f the package weren't insured, it would have been MY fault." >>
Yes, I was receiving the package.
I know what the rules are, but I have ethics, too. This is why I buy insurance or insure everything coming to me, and I save my butt by insuring everything that goes out. I know what to do, but in some situations, I don't agree with the "right" response.
I understand your admirable stance that it is the buyers responsibility to purchase insurance, just don't believe that a seller's duty to deliver should be routinely and abjectly tranferred to a buyer.
Better than in most cases, there is almost de facto proof of some sort of packaging error, as there is incontrovertible evidence that the package in this particular instance did not make it intact to within 200 miles of it's destination.
hey, cool, I didn't have to write good grief this time.....
Who can PROVE what was sent? Why should the buyer accept the loss without knowing exactly what was sent?
Yes, if you know the sender and trust them, that is one thing. If it is some "joe" off ebay, some you can trust and some you don't know about.....
SELLER should insure and charge the buyer if there is ANY doubt.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment