Solution to a missing package, who's at fault?

[1000-oaks]

Signature or not, if the tracking shows delivered, eBay closes "item not received" disputes in Seller's favor. No refund to Buyer, and Buyer cannot leave negative feedback for Seller. I've handled hundreds of eBay disputes over the last decade for a large online retailer (not outdoor goods).

If you really want to piss off your customers, send packages "signature required". You should experience the rage in calls and emails from customers who had to take a half-day off work to drive to their local USPS/UPS/FedEx location to sign for and pick up a package that could have just been dropped off. Even if the package was worth more than $750, which is the only time the company sends packages signature-required. Major inconvenience, unless the recipient has a family member that's always home.

[rangerjake]

So, have I shipped stuff without insurance etc? Sure. But if it goes missing, I intend to eat the cost.
This is a slightly more complicated situation - but yeah, I think I'd eat the cost - and certainly, splitting the loss equally seems utterly fair.

No disagreement that it would be fair to split the loss. Taint the question tho. What’s fair =/= what’s “owed”. Seller owes nothing. Could he be more generous? Sounds like it. But that’s courtesy, not justice.

[gregorys]

No disagreement that it would be fair to split the loss. Taint the question tho. What’s fair =/= what’s “owed”. Seller owes nothing. Could he be more generous? Sounds like it. But that’s courtesy, not justice.

Not attempting to be offensive - but this sounds like arguments of what is strictly "legal" vs what one "ought to do. "
IMO, that's what the the OP is asking - essentially; "Am I being unreasonable in asking the seller to split costs? Am I right to be frustrated?"

And IMO, whatever is legal or required, or what you can get PP to force your way or not - that is all totally irrelevant to "what is reasonable" and perhaps more clearly "what should I, as a decent human being, do here..."

And in the world of "what does a decent human being do..." I think splitting costs is the least I'd expect to do. I can only speak for myself, but in the world and way I choose to live, and the world I would want to live in - splitting costs is the answer. IMO, that *is* "just" and results in "justice." It might not "legally" be the way a court would rule, but I think most would believe it is fair and equitable. (Provided there's no startling information or detail about the situation we're not privy to.)

-Greg

[CirqueScaler]

Offering $40 + prodeal was a nice gesture and more than seller needed to offer, imo. But was the nice thing to do. Not sending $40 and prodeal is no bueno. If he didn't want to send $$ and prodeal, just politely decline.

It sucks being in either position, from experience.

[jacob_dbu]

Offering $40 + prodeal was a nice gesture and more than seller needed to offer, imo. But was the nice thing to do. Not sending $40 and prodeal is no bueno. If he didn't want to send $$ and prodeal, just politely decline.

It sucks being in either position, from experience.

I agree, but I think what was frustrating from my end is the way it extended out. The seller put in the requests to USPS (which I kind of knew would be declined given the package said delivered). But when I asked for an agreement to split the loss the seller could have told me, tough luck man - I don't think I'm responsible. I would have been sour for a moment, but gotten over it. Instead it was an offer for prodeal, then an offer for different goods, then an offer for partial refund which was defaulted on. I appreciate that the seller offered this, but the timeline and way it was offered (as if like pulling teeth) made me more sour than if he had just politely declined in the beginning. Perhaps this is me just being petty since several mags don't believe these offers were even warranted.

Anyways such is life. It seems the general consensus is the seller is not obligated to do anything in this case, but there is some sentiment that it would be reasonable for the seller to offer to split the loss. Some people agree with that and some people don't. I'm on the side of offering to split the loss in the case that this happens (both as a buyer and a seller). As gregorys mentioned this is the way I choose to live my life.

I will say, since this happened, when I buy things online now I almost always pay the PP fee. It's a small price to pay for some comfort (if only a false hope even - I've never actually tried to collect thru PP). If I sell, I leave it up to the buyer to decide since a F&F payment benefits the seller.

[Hopeless Sinner]

Check the tapes, start an investigation, maybe the local CSI crew will find semen. Then what?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

At least you know if the package was delivered and who picked it up from the mailroom. It's a pretty common feature especially in buildings w/out doormen. It's also a deterrent to a very common crime.

[old mexico]

Is it even worth spending all this time over it? I know times are tough for folk but money comes and goes and having such relatively minor thing get drawn out serves no purpose.

Sucks you got the short end of the stick but like others are saying, you’re buying from a forum and not a big box that will absorb losses.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[AK47bp]

Is it even worth spending all this time over it? I know times are tough for folk but money comes and goes and having such relatively minor thing get drawn out serves no purpose.

Sucks you got the short end of the stick but like others are saying, you’re buying from a forum and not a big box that will absorb losses.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Oh it’s worth it.


Big time.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Danno]

I'm in neither camp, and I have no idea what the "right" answer is, legally or morally or under TGR code. What I do know is that if I was in this scenario, on either end, and had no reason to doubt the honesty of the other party, I'd offer to split the problem.

[gregorys]

Is it even worth spending all this time over it? I know times are tough for folk but money comes and goes and having such relatively minor thing get drawn out serves no purpose.

IMO, it IS worth discussing.
The world you will get to live in is shaped by what the community feels is socially acceptable. (No matter what the "legal" framework might be.) If you *want* to live in a world where it's totally no-big-deal when someone gets the short end of the stick, then you act like it's no big deal when it happens to someone else. But if you want to live in a world where high levels of courtesy are expected, then you'll be invested in making that the "norm" even if it's a dollar and it's someone else's problem. (And sure there's nothing forcing people to offer that courtesy, or respect - but people that don't will feel uncomfortable in that community.)

Now, to be clear, I don't think this case is super black/white. I'm not advocating for banishing to the "bad" room, either party - though I think it's pretty clear what kind of action I'd advocate for...

I'll only speak for myself; If I were a seller and the buyer didn't get the goods and it wasn't a fault of either of us, then yeah, I'd be quite clear that we share the cost. That's the world *I* want to live in.

[1000-oaks]

Agree on pre-delivery; the seller bears 100% responsibility for the package up until the moment of delivery, no doubt about it.

If the buyer CHOOSES to not be available to personally receive the package from the shipping carrier, anything that happens to the package after delivery is 100% the buyer's responsibility. The seller can't force the buyer to secure his new personal property. If the buyer's personal property is stolen an hour, a week, or a year after delivery, the seller has no obligation to reimburse the buyer for the theft. That's what renters'/homeowners' insurance is for.

[jacob_dbu]

Agree on pre-delivery; the seller bears 100% responsibility for the package up until the moment of delivery, no doubt about it.

If the buyer CHOOSES to not be available to personally receive the package from the shipping carrier, anything that happens to the package after delivery is 100% the buyer's responsibility. The seller can't force the buyer to secure his new personal property. If the buyer's personal property is stolen an hour, a week, or a year after delivery, the seller has no obligation to reimburse the buyer for the theft. That's what renters'/homeowners' insurance is for.

I totally get that. And it's why I checked the mailroom on the day the package was expected...turns out USPS delivered it earlier. I should have setup text notifications, but AFAIK you have to manually do that for each package. Since this incident I have done that for any high-value or private item. In addition, if I was worried about a stolen package I 100% would have had additional actions in place to prevent that, but this was the first (and only) missing package I've experienced at my current place. I still wonder if it was stolen or the USPS carrier just fucked up. As noted, I really have a hard time believing that 3 USPS packages all "delivered" at the same time per tracking ended up missing and all the other 10's of packages in the mailroom had no issues whatsoever. It sounds to me like the USPS carrier either left them outside, delivered them to the wrong building, or just lost them all together. Perhaps if I had somehow been instantly notified that the package was delivered I could instantly check the mailroom and see what was going on. I've done that since this happened.

I'm not faulting the seller at all for the fact that the package didn't make it to me. The reality is that I didn't get the package and I'm out $135. Frankly, it sucks. I know that it happens occasionally. I'm asking whether the collective believes that I am right to be frustrated by the way things went down between me and the seller and whether the seller bears any social responsibility in this case. The verdict sounds like more no, than yes although there are a few folks that feel that splitting the loss would be the so-called "right" thing to do.

[rangerjake]

Not attempting to be offensive - but this sounds like arguments of what is strictly "legal" vs what one "ought to do. "
IMO, that's what the the OP is asking - essentially; "Am I being unreasonable in asking the seller to split costs? Am I right to be frustrated?"

And IMO, whatever is legal or required, or what you can get PP to force your way or not - that is all totally irrelevant to "what is reasonable" and perhaps more clearly "what should I, as a decent human being, do here..."

And in the world of "what does a decent human being do..." I think splitting costs is the least I'd expect to do. I can only speak for myself, but in the world and way I choose to live, and the world I would want to live in - splitting costs is the answer. IMO, that *is* "just" and results in "justice." It might not "legally" be the way a court would rule, but I think most would believe it is fair and equitable. (Provided there's no startling information or detail about the situation we're not privy to.)

-Greg

Oh you’ll hate me for this response if you thought my last one was too legal.

I don’t think the OP is searching for feelings validation. He’s trying to derive fault (it’s in the title).I think it’s reasonable to believe that if the consensus of people here was in his favor that we’d be in full callout mode (I could be wrong).

If it were me, I like to think I’d be willing to split the loss. Reality is I can’t say in all circumstances I would or wouldn’t. But honestly this seems to me like a situation where the onus does fall on the buyer. Not that he’s crazy or unreasonable or wrong- he can feel however he wants. But the reason the analysis sounds legal is because it’s a close call and one party feels gipped and the other party upheld their end of the bargain. When push comes to shove the circumstances dictate the buyer is owed nothing.

Additionally, and I am reading in context that may not be the case, but in our world of scraping by and financial uncertainty someone offloading gear may be doing so to pay for other real life shit. Perhaps offering up half because that’s the world he/we want to live in just isn’t in the cards rn. Esp considering all available evidence indicates the buyer couldn’t secure the item in his own mail room and feels like the loss should be shared (I have no insight if this is actually the case- it’s just the conclusion mandated by the facts).

I’m not a fan of the seller making commitments and reneging, but that’s an issue apart from the main. Frankly the seller’s doing that complicates an otherwise cut and dry analysis. Most reasonable outcome is the seller should pony up$40 unrelated to the package, but just because he said he’d do so.

[MakersTeleMark]

The moment the seller parted ways with their goods and slapped a tracking number on it to the proper address that transaction is over.

Period.

Take it up with your congressperson or mail room clerk.

But see,

December 28, 2020
Pre-Shipment Info Sent to USPS, USPS Awaiting Item
The U.S. Postal Service was electronically notified by the shipper on December 28, 2020 to expect your package for mailing. This does not indicate receipt by the USPS or the actual mailing date. Delivery status information will be provided if/when available.

Jan 22, 2021
6:33pm
Tracking number provided

Order placed on
Mon, Dec 14, 2020

Nothing ever showed up in my box, or in the system. Complete vanish. Ebay refund.

What I really wonder about is where all these missing packages end up. Like socks at the laundry. Where the fuck are they, and who wants a lens hood for a hasselblad portrait lens?

[Soups]

I still stand by my thoughts about this in my original post but this is all pretty funny and timely...

I sent out a package via USPS Priority almost 2 weeks ago. They gave me my receipt with the tracking number and I put it in my pocket. Let the buyer know it was on it's way and that was it.

Well, my dumbass as a seller didn't give him the tracking number since I was lazy and didn't want to type it all out and then I unknowingly tossed the receipt a few days/week later.

Due to that I just refunded the money.

[jacob_dbu]

I still stand by my thoughts about this in my original post but this is all pretty funny and timely...

I sent out a package via USPS Priority almost 2 weeks ago. They gave me my receipt with the tracking number and I put it in my pocket. Let the buyer know it was on it's way and that was it.

Well, my dumbass as a seller didn't give him the tracking number since I was lazy and didn't want to type it all out and then I unknowingly tossed the receipt a few days/week later.

Due to that I just refunded the money.

Did the buyer not get the item?

[MakersTeleMark]

I still stand by my thoughts about this in my original post but this is all pretty funny and timely...

I sent out a package via USPS Priority almost 2 weeks ago. They gave me my receipt with the tracking number and I put it in my pocket. Let the buyer know it was on it's way and that was it.

Well, my dumbass as a seller didn't give him the tracking number since I was lazy and didn't want to type it all out and then I unknowingly tossed the receipt a few days/week later.

Due to that I just refunded the money.

I sent a Christmas gift to Telemike's son. I bookmarked the tracking number, tossed the receipt, and put it on my desktop to check in on it.

Followed it all the way to delivered. Deleted the bookmark.

Package never got there.

Throws hands in air.

[gregorys]

Oh you’ll hate me for this response if you thought my last one was too legal.

I don’t think the OP is searching for feelings validation. He’s trying to derive fault (it’s in the title).I think it’s reasonable to believe that if the consensus of people here was in his favor that we’d be in full callout mode (I could be wrong).

LOL. NP.

As to the second part - who knows. Perhaps. But also, perhaps that's a fair way to approach it. He was double-checking to see what the community thought was "right." If we'd agreed he was "right" then he'd be justified in making more noise about it. If he misread the community values, he'd pipe down, realizing that he misread things (or at minimum, realizing he'd be "judged" by the community harshly.) Again, in many ways that seems like an "OK" approach.

Aside from what *I'd* like the community to be, and act - at least this helps set and inform people of the community expectations. And then those of us who buy and sell can make adjustments as needed. (Like I've often worded payments with "FOB" - which intends that you (the seller) are responsible for getting it safely into my hands.) I'm likely to be more explicit about what's the agreed on terms are in the future. (And/or be more aware of my risk and adjust what/how/how-expensive of stuff I buy here.)

But the core issue here for me is; How do I want to be treated. I'll treat others that way. And I do, even when it costs me.
Perhaps I have that balance wrong, and I need to be more protective of myself - but I can at least know that I've acted honorably - even if it might be foolish.

All around, interesting discussion. And in many cases, rather civil. (Which is kind of surprising - given this is TGR.)

[MakersTeleMark]

Seller is out X in goods;
Buyer is out X in funds.

Any further transaction is going to needlessly tip the scales.

Walk away.

[rangerjake]

LOL. NP.

As to the second part - who knows. Perhaps. But also, perhaps that's a fair way to approach it. He was double-checking to see what the community thought was "right." If we'd agreed he was "right" then he'd be justified in making more noise about it. If he misread the community values, he'd pipe down, realizing that he misread things (or at minimum, realizing he'd be "judged" by the community harshly.) Again, in many ways that seems like an "OK" approach.

Aside from what *I'd* like the community to be, and act - at least this helps set and inform people of the community expectations. And then those of us who buy and sell can make adjustments as needed. (Like I've often worded payments with "FOB" - which intends that you (the seller) are responsible for getting it safely into my hands.) I'm likely to be more explicit about what's the agreed on terms are in the future. (And/or be more aware of my risk and adjust what/how/how-expensive of stuff I buy here.)

But the core issue here for me is; How do I want to be treated. I'll treat others that way. And I do, even when it costs me.
Perhaps I have that balance wrong, and I need to be more protective of myself - but I can at least know that I've acted honorably - even if it might be foolish.

All around, interesting discussion. And in many cases, rather civil. (Which is kind of surprising - given this is TGR.)

Agreed T2B

I think for the buyer here it’s SOL. Not great news but so it goes.

For everyone else I think this is a good cautionary tale to help:
-maintain clear communication
-know how to protect your purchase or sale
-recognize there is a spectrum of acceptable behavior (legal vs moral standards)
-generally be skeptical about the current state of USPS.
-be somewhat shocked at a mostly constructive 4+pg TGR thread about who did who dirty.

Keep your tracking numbers and carry on

[Danno]

Seller is out X in goods;
Buyer is out X in funds.

Any further transaction is going to needlessly tip the scales.

Walk away.

What do you mean? How is the seller out anything here?

[rangerjake]

What do you mean? How is the seller out anything here?

Hah- I was thinking this was a poor analysis. True- both are out something. Except the seller gained 100% of the money, and buyer gained 0% of the product.

[Hopeless Sinner]

The moment the seller parted ways with their goods and slapped a tracking number on it to the proper address that transaction is over.

Period.

Ah, not really. The seller paid for a service in this case delivery. Until that service is completed w a delivery it's on the seller. The buyer can't make a claim in the event of damage or loss w the carrier because he didn't hire the carrier.

If the buyer hired the carrier and the carrier picked up the package then yes the seller's responsibility ends right there at pick up.


These informal deals with most all the details left unsaid are bound to go sideways sometimes.

[Hopeless Sinner]

I totally get that. And it's why I checked the mailroom on the day the package was expected...turns out USPS delivered it earlier. I should have setup text notifications, but AFAIK you have to manually do that for each package. Since this incident I have done that for any high-value or private item. In addition, if I was worried about a stolen package I 100% would have had additional actions in place to prevent that, but this was the first (and only) missing package I've experienced at my current place. I still wonder if it was stolen or the USPS carrier just fucked up. As noted, I really have a hard time believing that 3 USPS packages all "delivered" at the same time per tracking ended up missing and all the other 10's of packages in the mailroom had no issues whatsoever. It sounds to me like the USPS carrier either left them outside, delivered them to the wrong building, or just lost them all together. Perhaps if I had somehow been instantly notified that the package was delivered I could instantly check the mailroom and see what was going on. I've done that since this happened.

I'm not faulting the seller at all for the fact that the package didn't make it to me. The reality is that I didn't get the package and I'm out $135. Frankly, it sucks. I know that it happens occasionally. I'm asking whether the collective believes that I am right to be frustrated by the way things went down between me and the seller and whether the seller bears any social responsibility in this case. The verdict sounds like more no, than yes although there are a few folks that feel that splitting the loss would be the so-called "right" thing to do.

Yeah I feel like letting days go by before attempting to retrieve the package from the mailroom pretty well dooms your case. I'd be more inclined to believe it was USPS error rather than a simple theft from the mailroom if you were johnny-on -the spot. I think telling us that you waited speaks to your honesty and forthrightness.

You prob felt secure in the new building and were hoping to not have the same experience you had in SF at your old place so I can understand that too and that could be more frustrating than losing $135. So far I don't feel like you've enraged the "maggots"(a la bushwacka), but I'm sure you're on some "do not sell" lists now though. At this point why don't you call it quits on this thread while you're still mostly ahead?

[rangerjake]

Ah, not really. The seller paid for a service in this case delivery. Until that service is completed w a delivery it's on the seller. The buyer can't make a claim in the event of damage or loss w the carrier because he didn't hire the carrier.

If the buyer hired the carrier and the carrier picked up the package then yes the seller's responsibility ends right there at pick up.


These informal deals with most all the details left unsaid are bound to go sideways sometimes.

Ah, I got a feeling when something sells here it’s “$____ shipped” or “$_____ +ship”. That’s whatcha get. I don’t tie my sales to the independent actions of 3rd parties. If a buyer wants something in their hands when they hand over money they can go to REI and pay rack rate. That’s not a reasonable system here. On numerous occasions I’ve used the buyers preferred handling company- sometimes the buyer even provides the shipping label. Listing says shipped, not delivered. Words have meanings.