posted on February 21, 2005 02:56:48 PM new
I had a buyer who opted to not insure his package. It arrived broken. He filed for a PayPal Chargeback with the reason "Item significantly not as described". In truth, that was correct as the item was not broken when I shipped it. However, I'm wondering if this was what PayPal had in mind. Any thoughts?
posted on February 21, 2005 03:06:01 PM new
No, it's not what PayPal had in mind. Are you disputing this? If not, I would. In the future, you may want to do what I do. I get the insurance myself if it's a breakable item. It's not worth the risk for such a low dollar amount - insurance cost, I mean. Either that, or you could start requiring insurance on breakable items. I've started to do that.
Did the customer ask for their money back before filing? What a crock.
Cheryl
"No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power." ~ P.J. O'Rourke
posted on February 21, 2005 03:29:48 PM new
The thingy to remember, is that insurance protects the SELLER!
Of course, Cheryl is CORRECT-O-MUNDO!
If some clown donna buy INS, Ralphie springs for the extra whooping $0.40 or so for DSI -- tis better than getting into a pi$$ing match with an IRATE buyer -- NO?? YES!!
"Who could have possibly envisioned an erection — an election in Iraq at this point in history?" Prez.Jim Beam, at the White House, Washington, D.C., Jan. 10, 2005
posted on February 21, 2005 03:53:31 PM new
Actually, this happened a year or so ago...The guy was a jerk (no e-mails, etc.) and, as I recall, the item wasn't all that expensive. The first notice I received was the notice from PayPal! Decided to eat the loss as I didn't want to deal with the man...but, after reading another thread about PayPal chargebacks, wondered about this situation. I would do things differently now, I think. Thanks for the info...
posted on February 21, 2005 04:56:59 PM new
Unless paypal has made changes,as far as i know,paypal does not get involved with quality issue.
Unless it is significantly not as described for item paid under installment which is taken care of by GECC.
-sig file -------Life is one big happy 'All You Can Eat' buffet .
posted on February 21, 2005 08:38:46 PM new
We do what ole Ralphie's owner does. There's always been a debate over who is responsible for the insurance.
We side with those who understand it covers the seller and not the buyer. They have a right to expect to get what they pay for, right? You would, wouldn't you?
Do you see ANY legitimate retailer who suggests you insure your purchases made with them? Some regular catalogs today have items selling in the thousands of dollars each (doesn't have to be Neiman Marcus or Bloomies or Macy's anymore...). Their "shipping & handling" charges cover their expenses of lost or damaged items. I'd bet (because I don't know for a fact) that they eat any actual losses and they are covered by the fees that many purchases bring in. Since we don't deal in that scale, we rely on "insurance" companies to cover our losses.
We're down to 45-cents per $100 domestic shipping with DSI and that's just too little to worry about in the scheme of things and it gets rolled into our meager S&H charge.
Wayne
Never explain -- Your friends do not need it and your enemies will not believe you anyway.
~ Elbert Hubbard
posted on February 21, 2005 09:14:36 PM new
The large mail order companies don't "eat" any loses in shipping. A portion of the handling fee goes to pay for a blanket policy that reimburses them for any loses they incur. Their premiums are substantialy less than the $.45 DSI offers. It's an especially cozy arrangement when the retailer owns the insurance company, as was the case with Sears.
A $75.00 solid state device will always blow first to protect a 25 cent fuse ~ Murphy's Law
