question about purchasing from the forums - Time Talk - Time Tech Talk - TimeTechTalk.com

TimeTechTalk.com > Time Tech Talk > Time Talk > question about purchasing from the forums

Welcome to 3T! Please take the time to register and join in on the friendly,knowledgeable watch talk.Please note that not all registrations will receive an immediate activation e-mail.Those who do not receive an immediate notification will be activated manually within 48hrs. by an admin. without an e-mail activation url sent to you,you may then sign in using your username and password,if you feel there is a problem please e-mail us at timetechtalk@hotmail.com and include your name and username and we activate your account.Thank You!

Moderated by: 3T

Page: 1 2 3 4

Printer Friendly

question about purchasing from the forums

Author	Post

Posted: Thu Jun 5th, 2008 02:11 pm

jsb806f
Guest

Joined:
Location:
Posts:
Status:	Offline

Skipdawg wrote: Bottom line it is between buyer and seller and the seller has to deal with the shipper (UPS) in this case for the buyer.

I have a some what related matter right now. International shipment and package is either in the US Customs black hole or in a lost or stolen state.

But when a claim is filed you just have to sit back and wait. Not much the buyer or seller can do untill they get word back from the shipper.

So, when you sell a watch do you insure the watch as part of shipping or is that something extra that the seller must request?

Posted: Thu Jun 5th, 2008 02:27 pm

oagaspar
Site Founder

Joined:	Sun Sep 4th, 2005
Location:	Akron, USA
Posts:	28505
Status:	Offline

Speaking as a Sr. WIS I don't ship anything without insuring it and adding delivery confirmation at my expense on any watch I sell which really isn't that much extra $ for peace of mind and to cover loss .;)

I would be responsible and inclined as the seller to refund the buyer regardless of who lost it....it also insures it was received as the buyer must sign for ithand6.gif

Posted: Thu Jun 5th, 2008 02:35 pm

jsb806f
Guest

Joined:
Location:
Posts:
Status:	Offline

oagaspar wrote: Speaking as a Sr. WIS I don't ship anything without insuring it and adding delivery confirmation at my expense on any watch I sell which really isn't that much extra $ for peace of mind and to cover loss .;)

I would be responsible and inclined as the seller to refund the buyer regardless of who lost it....it also insures it was received as the buyer must sign for ithand6.gif

Speaking as a Novice WIS, sounds like good advice. Insurance doesn't cost that much anyway.

Posted: Thu Jun 5th, 2008 02:46 pm

KenC
Admin

Joined:	Sun Sep 4th, 2005
Location:	Florida &, Arizona USA
Posts:	11288
Status:	Offline

jsb806f wrote: KenC wrote: jsb806f wrote: Why do you assume the fault is with the seller? If UPS has a tracking number then the watched wasshipped by the seller. If it is "lost" or "stolen" after that why is it the seller's fault? Did you ask that the watch be insured? I'm not sure that PayPal will reimburse under these circumstances since it doesn't look like this is the seller's fault. I'd be going after UPS.

I think you may have misread YARGH's comment...I see nothing that even implies that he is blaming the seller. He even stated that he verified the shipment with UPS and they admitted that they had possession of it and now could not locate it.

Unless otherwise stated in the sale, it is the seller's responsibility to place insurance on the item being sold to protect against loss until it reaches the buyer. Delivery to a transit point does not constitute delivery to the purchaser.

That said, only the seller can go after UPS as the contract is with the shipper and not the consignee...I just went thru that with FedEx

I read nothing in my original comment to suggest that I implied that Yargh was blaming the seller. I wrote that it sounded like UPS lost the watch not the seller and that I didn't think that PayPal would reimburse for that. I am not criticizing Yargh.

The seller is responsible for insuring the item unless otherwise stated? Interesting. I would think the reverse is true. Unless otherwise stated in the ad the watch is not sent insured by the seller. Why should the seller automatically assume the cost of insuring an item? I have insured items that I have sold when asked to do so by the buyer. I don't think it is reasonable or wise for buyers to simply assume that sellers insure the item. That seems a little like assuming that unless otherwise stated in the ad that the seller will ship the watch overnight. Wouldn't it be safer for buyers to assume if it isn't in the ad it isn't being done? I know this is an awful situation for Yargh and I can sympathize with him. I hope everything works out to his advantage. The situation raises an interesting question about the responsibility of the seller once a watch has been shipped.

Okay...maybe it was this line that threw me off when you asked him, "Why do you assume the fault is with the seller?".

I, personally, assume it is the sellers responsibility to get the item you have purchased from him safely delivered to the purchaser. I know that if I shipped something and it did not get to the destination, I would feel responsible and make good. Obviously, my opinion and assumption is different than yours, but I think your analogy is way off...I automatically assume that the goods will be shipped the least expensive way possible unless otherwise stated. But none of this is worth arguing over, and I apologize if I misread your sentence!

Posted: Thu Jun 5th, 2008 03:03 pm

jsb806f
Guest

Joined:
Location:
Posts:
Status:	Offline

KenC wrote: jsb806f wrote: KenC wrote: jsb806f wrote: Why do you assume the fault is with the seller? If UPS has a tracking number then the watched wasshipped by the seller. If it is "lost" or "stolen" after that why is it the seller's fault? Did you ask that the watch be insured? I'm not sure that PayPal will reimburse under these circumstances since it doesn't look like this is the seller's fault. I'd be going after UPS.

I think you may have misread YARGH's comment...I see nothing that even implies that he is blaming the seller. He even stated that he verified the shipment with UPS and they admitted that they had possession of it and now could not locate it.

Unless otherwise stated in the sale, it is the seller's responsibility to place insurance on the item being sold to protect against loss until it reaches the buyer. Delivery to a transit point does not constitute delivery to the purchaser.

That said, only the seller can go after UPS as the contract is with the shipper and not the consignee...I just went thru that with FedEx

I read nothing in my original comment to suggest that I implied that Yargh was blaming the seller. I wrote that it sounded like UPS lost the watch not the seller and that I didn't think that PayPal would reimburse for that. I am not criticizing Yargh.

The seller is responsible for insuring the item unless otherwise stated? Interesting. I would think the reverse is true. Unless otherwise stated in the ad the watch is not sent insured by the seller. Why should the seller automatically assume the cost of insuring an item? I have insured items that I have sold when asked to do so by the buyer. I don't think it is reasonable or wise for buyers to simply assume that sellers insure the item. That seems a little like assuming that unless otherwise stated in the ad that the seller will ship the watch overnight. Wouldn't it be safer for buyers to assume if it isn't in the ad it isn't being done? I know this is an awful situation for Yargh and I can sympathize with him. I hope everything works out to his advantage. The situation raises an interesting question about the responsibility of the seller once a watch has been shipped.

Okay...maybe it was this line that threw me off when you asked him, "Why do you assume the fault is with the seller?".

I, personally, assume it is the sellers responsibility to get the item you have purchased from him safely delivered to the purchaser. I know that if I shipped something and it did not get to the destination, I would feel responsible and make good. Obviously, my opinion and assumption is different than yours, but I think your analogy is way off...I automatically assume that the goods will be shipped the least expensive way possible unless otherwise stated. But none of this is worth arguing over, and I apologize if I misread your sentence!

Ken,

Point taken. However, I don't think this is an argument as much as it is a discussion of best practice. :)

If you buy a watch from me and you don't receive it, I would offer to refund your money to you. I think that is the ethical and honest thing to do. Fortunately I have never experienced this situation. I probably should insure what I ship for my own protection not the buyers as Oscar does. That is something I have learned from our discussion. Insurance isn't something to protect the buyer it is something to protect the seller! The closest I have come to this situation is a buyer not being happy with the item he bought. I offered to refund his money and paid shipping costs both ways. Again, I think that is the ethical and honest thing to do.

Posted: Thu Jun 5th, 2008 05:12 pm

KenC
Admin

Joined:	Sun Sep 4th, 2005
Location:	Florida &, Arizona USA
Posts:	11288
Status:	Offline

jsb806f wrote:

Ken,

Point taken. However, I don't think this is an argument as much as it is a discussion of best practice. :)

If you buy a watch from me and you don't receive it, I would offer to refund your money to you. I think that is the ethical and honest thing to do. Fortunately I have never experienced this situation. I probably should insure what I ship for my own protection not the buyers as Oscar does. That is something I have learned from our discussion. Insurance isn't something to protect the buyer it is something to protect the seller! The closest I have come to this situation is a buyer not being happy with the item he bought. I offered to refund his money and paid shipping costs both ways. Again, I think that is the ethical and honest thing to do.

Then we are on the same wave length...I do insure packages that are going out that have a value in excess of $100...less than that, I take the risk and send with delivery confirmation only, but I do believe that it is my responsibility to see that the goods get to the purchaser safely. If they do not, then I believe, as you do, that the only ethical and responsible thing to do is to refund the buyer's money.

And you are absolutely correct about the application of insurance!

Posted: Thu Jun 5th, 2008 09:46 pm

hucky
3T WIS

Joined:	Mon Sep 3rd, 2007
Location:
Posts:	2242
Status:	Offline

What could go wrong in the Hands of the United Postal Service?

Great Topic nice points all the way around.

Cheers

Posted: Thu Jun 5th, 2008 10:02 pm

Skipdawg
3T WIS

Joined:	Thu Mar 29th, 2007
Location:	Washington USA
Posts:	14965
Status:	Offline

jsb806f wrote: oagaspar wrote: Speaking as a Sr. WIS I don't ship anything without insuring it and adding delivery confirmation at my expense on any watch I sell which really isn't that much extra $ for peace of mind and to cover loss .;)

I would be responsible and inclined as the seller to refund the buyer regardless of who lost it....it also insures it was received as the buyer must sign for ithand6.gif

Speaking as a Novice WIS, sounds like good advice. Insurance doesn't cost that much anyway.

And as for me I have never sold a watch online. The few recent I parted with were with local friends and family and was a hand to hand deal. :cool:

Back in the 90's I sold off about 40 quartz but did it on consignment at a local place. :)

But when I do sell a watch online here at 3T shipping (USPS Priority), insurance and paypal fees will be on me. ;)

Posted: Fri Jun 6th, 2008 12:53 pm

YARGH
3T WIS

Joined:	Mon Mar 17th, 2008
Location:	New York, New York USA
Posts:	75
Status:	Offline

Update on this: UPS notified me yesterday that the package was located, and that it will now be on its way. The estimated delivery day is next Wednesday. That's 9 days after the original delivery date. I haven't even told the seller about the problems yet (I didn't want to nix the transaction until I was certain that the item was lost), but I think I will, because he probably deserves a refund from UPS. They refused to do anything on my end, like bump it up to a faster tier of delivery, and he's the one who paid, so I guess he's the one who should ge a refund or some form of compensation. No way that UPS should be able to keep all of the postage, though -- this was terrible service.

Posted: Fri Jun 6th, 2008 01:18 pm

jsb806f
Guest

Joined:
Location:
Posts:
Status:	Offline

Wow! I've always had excellent service from UPS. Doesn't make sense that now they have found the package that it will take that long. I would think that UPS would next-day-deliver the item since they lost it originally. Seems like pooer CS to me.

Posted: Tue Jun 10th, 2008 08:02 am

YARGH
3T WIS

Joined:	Mon Mar 17th, 2008
Location:	New York, New York USA
Posts:	75
Status:	Offline

Further update: watch arrived yesterday, in the exact condition as described by the seller. I know I ignored some potential red flags here, but my communications with the seller led me to believe that everything would turn out OK in the end, and thankfully it did.

Posted: Tue Jun 10th, 2008 08:55 am

steve6387
3T WIS

Joined:	Fri Jul 13th, 2007
Location:	USA
Posts:	162
Status:	Offline

Good to hear that. Hope you enjoy the watch. As for myself, I got alot out of reading this post. being a mid-level WIS, with limited purchasing expereince this was a very good read. Even better knowing there is a happy ending!

--Steve

Current time is 07:04 pm	Page: 1 2 3 4
TimeTechTalk.com > Time Tech Talk > Time Talk > question about purchasing from the forums	Top

Lead Theme By: Di @ UltraBB
UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2012 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.2122 seconds (63% database + 37% PHP). 48 queries executed.