PDA

View Full Version : SOLD rubendh SCAM.. Two Sides to Every Story



jjm5812
April 17th, 2018, 11:57 PM
Buyer(rubendh) provided false/incorrect shipping address on international shipment - item in question (Stipula Etruria - Mint condition) was shipped and delivered to the address in September 2017 within standard international shipping times (10days) after receiving payment.

https://gyazo.com/fbeb0a102bb8c51d9aeb206b33a9ddf5

https://gyazo.com/faf1cd0617c9db996bfffd9221d14626

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have tried to locate package over the course of 6 months with a new USPS search request every month since package was sent to rubendh's incorrect address and ultimately lost in transit..
As such rubendh requested refund and has not received one because the item in question has never been returned to my possession since delivery at/to the incorrect address.


https://gyazo.com/f7fc48a9d3da5ffdd39ac7da13762cdb
---tracking number is same as one in first picture link;proof of same package----

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have conducted dozens and dozens of problem free transactions over the years without incident.
Examples of recent transactions:

https://gyazo.com/e39830e758d292005a2105a5bfb31256
https://gyazo.com/4d6671fc323d11db765ff091e80b4cb9
https://gyazo.com/cf4bf76669f0efd91fbce44e06cf697c
https://gyazo.com/58e2d6a798ca5c747cfe44c3f5f2d585
https://gyazo.com/644a62af3b8bf5a388a3c0b95609b402
https://gyazo.com/10f64b3c2d8ebbeffcfe4581af3cc064

Many of those transactions are pens posted and sold from the same listing rubendh purchased his Stipula from..

Unfortunately because the item was lost after attempted delivery to rubendh's falsely provided shipping address I was not willing to refund ruben.
I am in no position to refund payment for the Stipula Etruria after losing said pen to international shipping due to being provided incorrect and false address to ship and deliver to. Had I made a mistake or error in my duties to package and send the pen I would have no issue offering a refund as I have told ruben before. In this case shipment and delivery of the pen/package were well documented; as such I believe I fulfilled my duties as a seller. However, resulting problems that arose due being provided an incorrect and false address to ship and deliver to I cannot take responsibility for. As a result of ruben's incorrect shipping/delivery address the package was lost after delivery to said address - now he seeks refunds and payment for his own mistakes while attempting to harass me with PM threats and scam alert posts.
Not only did I maintain constant communication with ruben for almost half a year while this went on. I also spent hours on the phone waiting for a chance to speak to a USPS representatives countless times. Took numerous trips to the post office to check and ask for any information/news on the package. And filled monthly USPS missing package claims. I spent a ton of my time trying to help ruben get his pen that he had sent to the wrong address. If I had the pen back in my hands ruben would have his refund no problem.

Chrissy
April 18th, 2018, 12:00 AM
Please remove those links of your successful sales as they show your buyers names and addresses plus their PayPal account email addresses. They do on the other thread too.

jjm5812
April 18th, 2018, 12:11 AM
my fault - updated

rubendh
April 18th, 2018, 12:51 AM
As I don't think this is the place to continue the discussion, I marked my post as sold. This results in that comments can not be made and it won't bump anymore.

This discussion probably bothers people so I suggest you to do the same.
If not, I highly suggest you to stop lying.

In this post you say that you don't have pen the back back from being returned. And try to prove that with screenshots, right?
However, is this true?

Please read the last paragraph of your message:
https://image.ibb.co/m6F9e7/Screenshot_20180418_073151.jpg

The goal of my post is to warn people that this situation with you happened. Why? Because after numerous messages you just flatanly ignored me for months on FPN.

The goal is reached as you finaly contacted me again via PMs. I suggest further contact will be aswell as PMs.
Thanks

Chrissy
April 18th, 2018, 12:55 AM
@rubendh In marking your thread Sold, it closed the thread and jjm5812 can't edit his post to remove all of the personal information that needs to be removed in there. Can you maybe mark it Unsold for a short time in order that he can just edit his post?

rubendh
April 18th, 2018, 01:05 AM
@rubendh In marking your thread Sold, it closed the thread and jjm5812 can't edit his post to remove all of the personal information that needs to be removed in there. Can you maybe mark it Unsold for a short time in order that he can just edit his post?

Will do, please ping me when the info has been removed so I could close it again

jjm5812
April 18th, 2018, 04:08 AM
Yes I did tell you that when tracking had said the package was at my local post for delivery after 4 months of waiting. However the package was in the end, never returned. You saw the tracking at that time, that it was in my area, so you did not pursue the subject under the same impression as I: that I would receive the package back soon. In the end it never came, it was the week of Christmas. If you had bothered to use the tracking number I provided to you over and over you would have seen that, in fact any calls you place to USPS customer service with the tracking number can confirm that after reaching my area that package was marked and sent to MRC Atlanta. There is no delivery receipt or tracking afterwords because the package was never delivered or scanned outgoing again. Feel free to use the tracking number and check the facts with USPS.


By now I am aware that you will probably never come to face the reality that: had you provided a correct and legitimate address for shipping to on your PayPal - you would have received your pen in September when you purchased it. You were not scammed by the person who shipped the package the day after payment was received, who sent the package to your false PayPal address, who worked with you from September - January, over 5 months, in constant contact and communication to try and rectify your mistake while you pursued me to fix it doing nothing yourself. I spent more time waiting at the post office and on the phone waiting to get a chance to talk to USPS customer service than you care to accept or realize.

Seems to me that you scammed yourself by providing a false address for me to ship to. Unfortunately for me resulted in spending the numerous hours waiting at the post office, and on the phone with USPS customer service, trying to help you fix the situation and mistake you created. I did not scam you when I shipped the package with your pen. I did not scam you when it was delivered to the false PayPal address you provided, and I certainly did not scam you by spending half a year trying to help you with it. In the end the reality that you scammed yourself by providing a false international shipping address is simple to understand. The tracking information has all the facts. Hopefully you will understand that had you given a legitimate address on your PayPal for me to ship to - the pen would have been delivered 10 days after you paid for it. On the same day as the delivery confirmation posted on the tracking to your false address.

By having the pen delivered to a false address and ultimately lost while being shipped across the globe, during Christmas holiday season no less is your self created scam. There is no one to blame but yourself in this situation. I did everything I could and should have done to help you. Trying to label me as a scammer because you cannot accept the facts or reality of the situation is petty. While you "reached your goal" of having me reply to your threats and harassment PM's finally makes no difference. This is already in the past for me and I have moved on. Your time is your own and while you can continue to link addresses you think are mine with threats in your PM's; I would suggest you find a better use of your time. You're only embarrassing yourself. Take the time, check the facts, and realize the reality of your so called scam. Providing a legitimate address on your PayPal for an international shipment would probably have changed the outcome just a little bit.

Chrissy
April 18th, 2018, 05:25 AM
There are indeed two sides to every story, and maybe we have the general gist of what happened now. It seems like there may have been problems with the address and the delivery, that could have been different.

However, when it comes down to the "nitty gritty" it is up to the seller to ensure that the buyer receives the item or gets his money back. That is the basis of the contract. The seller is the only person who can claim through whatever courier or postal service was used for delivery.

FredRydr
April 18th, 2018, 05:34 AM
But Jason, since you acknowledged that his Stipula was in your house in January of this year, why are you writing all this stuff about lost packages and a buyer using false addresses? I have contacted both of you by PM with a suggested resolution so the matter can be closed.

jjm5812
April 18th, 2018, 06:17 AM
It is already mentioned in Rubens thread that the Stipula was not actually in my possession. As I have mentioned in my thread as well the Stipula was shown to be in the local post office on the tracking when I told Ruben that. He acknowledged it was indeed finally back to my city and so the PayPal claim timer was let to run out a few hours later. In the end it was never delivered and instead routed from local post office to USPS MRC (mail recovery center) in Atlanta where it has not been located since January when it was last scanned into the MRC. All it takes to confirm this with USPS is for ruben to call them with the provided tracking number from half a year ago. I called them last month while filing the USPS Missing Mail Claim/Search and they were able to give me a full-rundown of the tracking from the day it was shipped to the day it was scanned into the MRC. They even give you the reason that it was re-routed from local post office to MRC instead of my house which was the fact that there was no longer a legible label on the package to deliver to. In any case the reason for the screenshot USPS Claim is to show that indeed the package is listed as missing and has been filed to be searched for, as recently as last month. Currently I still do not have the pen and the truth of the matter is I have never seen the pen again since shipping it last September - USPS tracking can also confirm that.

Jobesmirage
April 18th, 2018, 06:17 AM
I don't think that this is generally true if the seller sent an item to the address provided since the item was delivered to the address provided. The issue here is that item looks like it was rejected... so the ultimate question from a third party is where is the pen now?

jjm5812
April 18th, 2018, 06:24 AM
As I pointed - the truth of the entire situation can be found with the USPS tracking should ruben or anyone else decide to take advantage of the feature. It requires calling USPS customer service line and speaking to a representative, or a USPS employee at a local branch for the information to be pulled up. Since the tracking is so old it is no longer in service but the tracking number is still in use as the Missing Mail claim for it has never been closed. A physical system search by a USPS employee can reveal the dated tracking information including when it was shipped, delivered, delivery refused, etc.

mmd
April 18th, 2018, 06:42 AM
According to my experience, if a USPS package is returned to your local sorting center, the possibility that it eventually gets lost is very slim. I'm not judging if you have truly received it or not but I believe there are ways you can get it back. Just go to your local sorting center and ask the people there. It's very likely that the package is just sitting at the corner and no one bothers to respond to the USPS search you initiated online. Probably the label got ripped off or something.

However, you have to do this immediately when you didn't get it. Otherwise, it will get collected as a missing package and send to the missing package center. If there's no address indicator inside the package, there's no hope to get it back at that phase.

Chrissy
April 18th, 2018, 07:02 AM
A long time ago, in a Galaxy far, far away, I sold an item via ebay to someone in the US. I couldn't work out why an expensively mailed, fully tracked and insured parcel, disappeared off of the face of the Earth, and had not been delivered by USPS or signed-for in the US. Following much trial and error, and many emails later, I managed to track down someone who assisted and helped me to trace it. Then got it safely delivered. This is the email address of that person: lisa.a.saunders@usps.gov

jjm5812
April 18th, 2018, 08:24 AM
The package was received to my local post office back in January exactly during the time I had said I had it in my possession. I had believe I would have it within the next day or so however - upon arrival to the post office the package "was declared dead mail because it was damaged" and sent to the Mail Recovery Center in Atlanta. "Damaged" I was told meant that there was no longer a return address on the box anymore most likely from the label missing.

This is information given to me only 20-30minutes ago from the 1 (800) 275-8777 USPS Customer Service Menu Extensions 3 3 8 to talk to a live employee after waiting on the phone for 40minutes. Asking for extensive tracking for the original tracking number CX328804417US will give you all the details regarding the item. It cannot be found online anymore as they do not keep tracking information online for after 120days

jjm5812
April 18th, 2018, 08:27 AM
The package was sent to the Mail Recovery Center after being declared "damaged" and missing a return label upon receipt at post office when it arrived back in the USA from Belgium custom - after 4 months in customs. As a result the only thing I could do was file a USPS Missing Mail/Search Claim which screenshot is attached to the original post. The package was never found and still not found - at this point USPS employees tell me it is unlikely I will receive it back after 90 days at Mail Recovery Center in Atlanta.

Pterodactylus
April 18th, 2018, 08:55 AM
At least in Europe the legal situation is really clear.

The seller(company) is responsible that the consumer get the ordered goods.
If the goods got lost or damaged it’s the problem of the seller not the consumer.
The consumer is only responsible from that point in time when he received and signed for the goods.

So imo it does not matter if it got lost on transport (back to you or not) the consumer did not received his item, clearly your problem Jjm.

Don´t know if the regulations outside Europe are much different, here I would also claim my money back and most likely will receive it (if paid with PayPal or credit card).

Chrissy
April 18th, 2018, 09:14 AM
If the buyer paid for an item and has not received it, then he gets his money back. It's quite straightforward. Wherever the parcel is now or where it has been and when doesn't matter. It's the responsibility of the seller to get the item to the buyer.

rubendh
April 18th, 2018, 09:24 AM
If the buyer paid for an item and has not received it, then he gets his money back. It's quite straightforward. Wherever the parcel is now or where it has been and when doesn't matter. It's the responsibility of the seller to get the item to the buyer.

Also when the buyer buys something expensive (in my case sth of 350 usd) and the seller decides to not insure the package. And then sth happens (in this case in the returning of the package) and then he tries to say it's the buyers fault...??

mmd
April 18th, 2018, 09:48 AM
If the buyer paid for an item and has not received it, then he gets his money back. It's quite straightforward. Wherever the parcel is now or where it has been and when doesn't matter. It's the responsibility of the seller to get the item to the buyer.

Frankly I don't think it's as straightforward as that. If the buyer gives wrong address and the package gets delivered to that address and signed by someone at that address, I think it's still buyer's responsibility. Of course, it doesn't apply in this situation because the package was not signed.

adhoc
April 18th, 2018, 11:19 AM
It’s the buyers responsibility to have correct Paypal address set up.

AzJon
April 18th, 2018, 11:36 AM
It’s the buyers responsibility to have correct Paypal address set up.

It is also the seller's responsibility to appropriately insure packages of any value. I've mailed very expensive items in the past and made sure to get the insurance to cover every single penny in the event it was lost or damaged in transit.

Pterodactylus
April 18th, 2018, 11:39 AM
At least here in Europe you don’t have to take care if the seller insures the package or not, he chooses the transportation, it’s always his risk.
And if something is cheap or expensive is for sure irrelevant.

Here for business sellers (and to be treated as a business seller often a few documented sells e.g. on ebay are enough) the seller is not even allowed to put the transportation risk on to the consumers sholders (consumers are special protected).
Even when he let you choose between insured or not insured, such clauses are not valid (between 2 private people the situation might be different, they can agree to almost everything, e.g. exclude warranty, what many people do not know even on private sells you have to give warranty if not explicitly excluded in advance).

The only exception is when you refuse all from the seller offered shipping methods and you as a buyer contract a transportation company to pick up the item. (But in real life something like this most likely will not happen)

Pterodactylus
April 18th, 2018, 11:44 AM
Ruben, did you opened a paypal case?
And did you already got your money back?

kirchh
April 18th, 2018, 01:22 PM
jjm5812 (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/member.php/10600-jjm5812), why did you lie to the buyer about your having the pen in your home in an attempt to have the PayPal claim closed, and then laugh about it?

This part doesn't make any sense to me.

--Daniel

Dhruv
April 18th, 2018, 01:33 PM
Ruben, did you opened a paypal case?
And did you already got your money back?

Don't think you can file a PayPal claim after 180 days.

I understand (not agree) that buyer has to receive an item to free the seller of responsibility of safe delivery, but if the buyer gives the wrong address and the package gets lost, don't think the seller has to entertain the buyer any further.
If you are not even capable of giving a correct delivery address (which is your own address in most cases), explains the level of incompetence of the buyer.
Also, I'm not comfortable with the upper hand given to the buyer by PayPal. Both parties should have equal rights.

Chrissy
April 18th, 2018, 02:34 PM
If the buyer paid for an item and has not received it, then he gets his money back. It's quite straightforward. Wherever the parcel is now or where it has been and when doesn't matter. It's the responsibility of the seller to get the item to the buyer.

Frankly I don't think it's as straightforward as that. If the buyer gives wrong address and the package gets delivered to that address and signed by someone at that address, I think it's still buyer's responsibility. Of course, it doesn't apply in this situation because the package was not signed.
No it isn't straightforward in this case. You're quite right. The fact that it travelled to the buyers requested address then travelled back again is really unusual, and not all parcels require a signature on delivery.

adhoc
April 18th, 2018, 03:00 PM
It’s the buyers responsibility to have correct Paypal address set up.

It is also the seller's responsibility to appropriately insure packages of any value. I've mailed very expensive items in the past and made sure to get the insurance to cover every single penny in the event it was lost or damaged in transit.

True. But this really isn’t a scam, whatever way you look at it. They both made some mistakes, but a straight up scam this is not.

Chrissy
April 18th, 2018, 03:38 PM
True. But this really isn’t a scam, whatever way you look at it. They both made some mistakes, but a straight up scam this is not.

Absolutely. :) Whatever this should be called, it's not a scam. :( A scammer is someone who sells something with no intention of sending anything. :(

Jon Szanto
April 18th, 2018, 03:42 PM
If one were to utilize adult language, one might refer to it as a clusterfuck of butthurt. I, for one, would never type that into a Reply window.

rubendh
April 18th, 2018, 07:26 PM
The seller said that the pen has returned to him (in his house) but then goes silent for months after that... litteraly. His last message to me ever was that he had the pen sitting in his house.
I messaged him 5 times after that last message, over the course of months, asking when he will send the pen back but ignores it all.
Wouldn't you percieve this as a scammer? I believe you would aswell...

Combined with his crappy sense of communication (he only replies once every few weeks) and with the fact that he lies about the situation..
After I put this discussion in this board, he explained with screenshots that the pen was in fact not at his house but lost in the mail system. Why wouldn't he just said that to me directly? Would save a lot of insulting..

When a package returns for any reason (declined by recipient, package was opened or damaged during transport, recipient not home, ...), and the package is lost during transport who's responsible?

Anyways. To conclude:

If it's the case that he does not have the pen, indeed, he's not a scammer when you look at it from the point of resending the pen or not.

He is, however, a flatant lier that lies to buyers just to cash in the money. (How is this called... scamming?)


This whole situation will not give me my money back, and will not give me my pen back.
It's just how Jason handled the situation (lying, not insuring an expensive package) that is not right. I will never ever do business with him again and strongly advise other people to do the same.
Indeed, the situation would not have happend would I have given my new adress. I still believe the buyer did not fulfill his responsibilities.

That's my final conclusion and it will not change the situation.
Because of this, I will not reply anymore to these threads.
People still following up on this situation can always message me through PM.

mmd
April 18th, 2018, 08:08 PM
When a package returns for any reason (declined by recipient, package was opened or damaged during transport, recipient not home, ...), and the package is lost during transport who's responsible?


This is a good question actually.

heraclitus682
April 18th, 2018, 08:40 PM
What is for sale in this thread? I must have missed it.

Pterodactylus
April 18th, 2018, 11:52 PM
Also this is an example why I think buying things in a forum is a bad idea.
Not only because I’m annoyed by the huge amount of selling threads.
A forum just does not have any tools, background to support and help in case of troubles.

You are on your own.... just trusting the honesty and integrity of people you do not know,

No transparent seller profile, no seller rating, customer feedback, transaction rating, no advanced buyer protection, no issue handling system (paying, transportation, condition of the items, warranty, return of goods in case something is not as expected), , no transaction tracking, ......

I don’t say the initial situation could not have happened on platforms like ebay, but it most likely wouldn’t end like this as he would have opened a case right when he didn’t received his pen (and sellers most likely often will react differently because they have to take care about their profile otherwise will sell less or nothing anymore) .

Much more buyers protection, seller transparency, issue handling possibilities, support from the platform.

So for me there is not a single good reason to buy something from a simple forum thread, unless you like the thrill in case something isn´t as expected.

Such buys here are based on blind trust, and not all deserve such a trust

jjm5812
April 19th, 2018, 12:07 AM
Under normal circumstances for a transaction I would agree that the seller takes most of the responsibility towards making sure the item is received. Yes, mistakes were made on both sides - however I did everything I could over the course of September - January to get Ruben his pen after it was delivered to the wrong address he provided. In this case I had priced the item and clearly stated that shipping costs would be added onto the listed price. Ruben contacted me at first offering a trade, during this trade I agreed to lower the list price and essentially do a 1:1 equal trade with him. Agreeing to that and assuming we were trading pens I did not include shipping costs into the trade price because we would both be paying shipping for pens sent to one another. The trade never happened as Ruben was unable to obtain the pen he wished to trade me.

Based on his request to purchase the pen I sent him an invoice total with the listed sales price for the pen + shipping costs. The invoice was declined as Ruben explained the price I was invoicing/selling for was not the same as the price I had given under the assumption we would perform a trade. This was referring to the lowered price I offered to make the trade easier on him for a 1:1 trade based on each pens stated value. Shipping costs were not included in the trade price Ruben requested I sell to him for - as I had assumed we would both be shipping each other the pens. While I thought it petty of him to leverage the lower price I specifically stated was the trade value meant to help his trade offer I accepted the discounted price based on Rubens expressed love and seemingly genuine appreciation for the Stipula. I had sold all the Visconti's, OMAS, Pelikans in the sales post of which the Stipula was the last item for sale. I had the means to take a small loss on the pen at that point and I was okay with doing so if it meant helping someone get a pen they dearly wanted while only having limited funds to spend. Normally, for any type of international shipments, I prefer to use USPS International Express which is quick and, in my experience, reliable. Buyer of course pays the shipping fees. At the time I had never had any shipping issues, problematic trades, or poor responses of any sort from the dozens and dozens of pens I had sold - mostly high price $500+ items, though, price is irrelevant and I treat all pens the same way. With the intention of doing Ruben a favor - I accepted the lowered the price and took a loss on the Stipula pen he had expressed he really wanted but could not purchase at list price. I mentioned in this situation that because Ruben would not pay for shipping costs and I would pay it myself that: I would use a cheaper shipping method than I normally preferred, opting for USPS International Priority instead of International Express. I took a hit on the shipping as it was still not cheap - paying for what is normally the buyers expense. Combined with the lowered list price and PayPal fees I received a fairly low return on the pen, but that was okay since I knew Ruben would enjoy it. Ruben acknowledged that cheaper shipping with International Priority was not a problem as long as the pen did not take "over 5 weeks" to be delivered which I assured him shouldn't happen (the delivery notification of the pen to Rubens PayPal address was 10 days after I shipped it). Unfortunately I did not know what I was getting myself into at the time.

While there is undoubtedly bias to both mine and Ruben's responses - I am simply stating the facts, no exaggerations or embellishments. As Ruben states above that my contact and communication was poor - going through our messages my average response time was 1-3 days after you sent a PM. Longest time between responses was exactly 7 days until Christmas/Winter break through January. Keep in mind all other listings and transactions of mine had long been completed Rubens was the only one I was dealing during the school year, something I always try to avoid as I am busy(I post sale listings when I am not in school and have the time to give potential buyers the service they deserve.) Nonetheless because Ruben's package was delivered to his PayPal address and not his actual address his transaction ran into the school year. I had exam weeks, out of country travels (winter break 4 weeks/Spring break 10 days), and various other duties to attend to. I did my best to accommodate any questions Ruben had. Within our conversations I linked him the tracking number on 5 separate occasions to refer to as most information's he requested could be found using the USPS tracking number. From his responses and questions it's clear he ever decided to take advantage of that wonderful feature. I believe that - had Ruben decided to use the invaluable tracking number to fact check the status of his package instead of relying on me to paraphrase the tracking information for him - this entire situation and drama could probably have been avoided. Ruben would know exactly what happened to the package, and would know whether or not what I said was true or false. I repeatedly referred Ruben to the tracking number so he could check and see exactly what was going on with the package at any moment. While this all took place over the 5 month period, I had also dedicated tons of my personal time towards visiting the post office regularly to check and see if anything could be done regarding the Stipula package, as well as when the tracking was stagnant for longer periods of time. When I could not spend the 20min bus ride to and from the post office to my dorm I spent what must have been over 15-20 hours on the waiting line for USPS' 1800 customer service number to speak with a representative. Be prepare to wait minimum times of an hour or more to speak to someone if you use that number, it can be very helpful though. Ultimately over the course of 5 months Sept 2017 - January 2018 I never failed to get back to Ruben when I had the opportunity and time to give him a proper response to his inquiries. Personally I felt I went above and beyond what I was expected of me - I could have just sent Ruben the tracking and been done with him. Being the scammer Ruben believes me to be: Looking back, I regret the tens of hours I wasted trying to help Ruben recover the package after delivery and shipment confirmation to his PayPal address. Answering Rubens questions with answers easily found using the USPS tracking system ultimately gives me the impression Ruben was simply too lazy or incompetent to do his due diligence using the tracking number that was provided, repeatedly.


Ruben's biggest argument is a statement of mine where I told him I had the package in my hands.
Many people ask why I told Ruben I had the package in my hands. The situation was: After 4 months of waiting, Belgium customs finally released the pen back to the US and was eventually in the possession of my local post office. The tracking stated the package had been sorted and in my experience the next step is delivery. At this point I believed it only a day or two before the package was in my hands and so I lied, yes, and I told Ruben that I had the pen when in fact I did not have it physically in my possession but fully expected to in the near future which would have not been an issue. Unfortunately this blew back on me because despite the package being sorted by USPS as shown on the tracking, it was not sorted to be loaded and sent for re-delivery to me, but instead sorted as dead mail and sent to the Mail Recovery Center in Atlanta. There was nothing I could do at this point besides filing a Search Claim for USPS Mail Recovery Center in hopes that they would find the package and send it back to me. Information provided to me by a USPS customer service representative, using USPS 1800 Customer Service line, revealed that the package was marked as damaged by someone at my local post office which is why it labeled dead mail and sent to MRC Atlanta. The most likely scenario for this as provided by customer service rep. was that the shipping label was damaged and they could not determine where to deliver the pen anymore. Understandable considering the amount of traveling the package did with and a paper label. Even after filing monthly claims to the Mail Recovery Center, to this day, I have not received information that the package was located nor have I received delivery of the Stipula. I have told Ruben to call this number to confirm for himself the situation regarding the Stipula. Once again Ruben, if you just used a bit of effort to call the USPS 1800 C.S. phone number, wait 30min-1hr, and speak to a representative (menu extension 3 3 8) - an action I have done countless times for him - and something that would be definitive proof towards revealing the facts and the truth on the final whereabouts of the Stipula and any other stops during its journey since Sept. 2017. In fact, anyone could ask for an "extensive search" for tracking # CX328804417US as a "the package was sent to the Mail Recovery Center" to reveal the truth/facts and shed light on the final whereabouts and anything in between for the Stipula. I suspect the truth is not as important to Ruben as creating drama and attempts to label me a "Scammer" otherwise he would have called the number like I suggested awhile back, or possibly even tried to utilize the tracking number I gave him.


I realized that in 2017, as a seller, I was probably naive and inexperienced I had nothing but smooth and wonderful experiences with regard to past sales, transactions, and communications between other FP forum members and fountain pen collectors/hobbyists. Having never had a bad experience from any one of the many deals I was party to - probably made me too comfortable with regard to making transactions within the FP community. I feel I did everything in my power to try and resolve the problems caused by shipping to Ruben's PayPal address - not his real shipping address that he later revealed to me upon delivery to be completely different. I've sunk a lot of time and effort into this one transaction with Ruben; more than all the rest of my 80+ transactions combined. Some important lessons were learned from this transaction. Despite that I have continued to enjoy participating in the community and hobby as I did before meeting Ruben. Mistakes were made on both sides of this transaction. Sure.

I've never scammed anyone, or been interested in scamming anyone. While Ruben is determined to argue otherwise - if only he could have skillfully executed the copy and paste, advanced technique, with copied CX328804417US tracking number pasted into USPS.com in the past. Or, at this point, because tracking is no longer available online toss his fears and dial USPS 1(800)275-8777 Customer Service and speak to a USPS representative over the phone to do an "extensive search" for CX328804417US. He may have been able to find some comfort in the truth of the situation.

Jon Szanto
April 19th, 2018, 12:19 AM
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/391/898/f86.jpg

mhosea
April 19th, 2018, 12:42 AM
I confess I don't have time to sort all of this out, but from what I understand, the buyer provided an incorrect address. Advantage seller, but that just means the buyer is on the hook for the full cost of re-shipping, or the original shipping cost can be deducted from the refund if the deal is off. It doesn't mean the seller is off the hook to deliver the merchandise or issue a refund. There is some risk in mail-order, which is why the shipper can buy insurance. It's always seemed strange to me that sellers will give buyers the option of paying for insurance, as if the buyer were the primary insured. The way I figure it, shipping insurance is something I, the shipper, buy to mitigate the risk that the item will get lost or damaged in transit. In fact, I have rarely bought shipping insurance, but at the same time I explicitly considered myself "self-insured", as I was prepared to take the loss if something went awry, which it has once or twice, though not in large matters. For example, I must have torqued down the cap on a TWSBI a little too tight when I packaged it, and vibration and/or temperature variations in transit resulted in the cap cracking. I just refunded the whole shebang and moved on with my life. That's just the way it is. There is no life without risk. Shit happens.

I find the whole matter of claiming to have received a pen back when it wasn't back to be rather troubling despite the explanation, but fortunately, it is irrelevant to the correct disposition of this matter.
The bottom line is that the buyer paid for a pen that they don't have, and they contributed to this result by providing an incorrect address. The seller should refund the buyer's payment less the actual cost of shipping.

Chrissy
April 19th, 2018, 01:25 AM
The way I figure it, shipping insurance is something I, the shipper, buy to mitigate the risk that the item will get lost or damaged in transit. In fact, I have rarely bought shipping insurance, but at the same time I explicitly considered myself "self-insured", as I was prepared to take the loss if something went awry, which it has once or twice, though not in large matters. For example, I must have torqued down the cap on a TWSBI a little too tight when I packaged it, and vibration and/or temperature variations in transit resulted in the cap cracking. I just refunded the whole shebang and moved on with my life. That's just the way it is. There is no life without risk. Shit happens.

I find the whole matter of claiming to have received a pen back when it wasn't back to be rather troubling despite the explanation, but fortunately, it is irrelevant to the correct disposition of this matter.

The bottom line is that the buyer paid for a pen that they don't have, and they contributed to this result by providing an incorrect address. The seller should refund the buyer's payment less the actual cost of shipping.
This is a well put post, and the final sentence seems like the right solution. :agree:

Although the buyer should have known his correct mailing address, and made 100% certain that was the address on his PayPal account, it should only potentially cost him two lots of shipping costs instead of one. That should be the only cost of his mistake. I'm sure he's not the first person to buy something then become aware that the wrong address was on his PayPal account, and he won't be the last. :(

If he ends up with absolutely nothing after paying money to buy an item from a seller, then that can never be right. He surely has to get his money back. :agree:

Dhruv
April 19th, 2018, 06:13 AM
The bottom line is that the buyer paid for a pen that they don't have, and they contributed to this result by providing an incorrect address. The seller should refund the buyer's payment less the actual cost of shipping.

Just asking: No penalties?
Even if the seller sends it back to the new address by taking more postage, it requires more time and effort on the part of the seller. Surely that is worth something. It was something that shouldn't have been required in the first place had the buyer bothered to check the details he entered on PayPal.

rubendh
April 19th, 2018, 07:00 AM
Just asking: No penalties?
Even if the seller sends it back to the new address by taking more postage, it requires more time and effort on the part of the seller. Surely that is worth something. It was something that shouldn't have been required in the first place had the buyer bothered to check the details he entered on PayPal.

I ofcourse offered to pay the new shipping and packing costs. If he'd want to be compensated for the extra effort aswell I'd have no problem paying 5 usd more. No problem!

rubendh
April 19th, 2018, 07:08 AM
I just refunded the whole shebang and moved on with my life. That's just the way it is. There is no life without risk. Shit happens.

I find the whole matter of claiming to have received a pen back when it wasn't back to be rather troubling despite the explanation, but fortunately, it is irrelevant to the correct disposition of this matter.
The bottom line is that the buyer paid for a pen that they don't have, and they contributed to this result by providing an incorrect address. The seller should refund the buyer's payment less the actual cost of shipping.

Yup. The shipping, packaging and effort is at the very most 50 usd. I'm expecting the 300 usd anytime soon!

ethernautrix
April 19th, 2018, 07:34 AM
What does the seller get, since he no longer has the pen he'd further discounted as a favor to the buyer? Did the buyer, trying to keep his costs low, accept the risk of cheaper postage without insurance?

AzJon
April 19th, 2018, 08:18 AM
What does the seller get, since he no longer has the pen he'd further discounted as a favor to the buyer? Did the buyer, trying to keep his costs low, accept the risk of cheaper postage without insurance?

Without properly insuring the pen...screwed. The Seller gets screwed. Were he an actual standing retail business, they would have to eat the cost.

Worth noting that while both sides made gross errors of oversight, at the moment the party at fault is the USPS. Had USPS not lost/re-routed the return package, everything would be fine at the moment. Therefore, USPS should be the one on the hook for awarding the paid insurance amount on the package. If the seller failed to properly insure a package and it gets lost/destroyed...a hard lesson to learn.

Insurance isn't for the buyer, it's for the seller. Period. It means the seller can recoup lost cost if a product goes missing. It protects the buyer only insofar as the seller will 100% have the means to refund them without taking a hit.

Pterodactylus
April 19th, 2018, 08:19 AM
What does the seller get, since he no longer has the pen he'd further discounted as a favor to the buyer? Did the buyer, trying to keep his costs low, accept the risk of cheaper postage without insurance?

To be honest I don’t care about the seller, he took the risk to sent the pen without insurance, it was his decision.
To be a seller, a businessman not only means to make profit and have no risks, just easy peasy business.
In this case he made the wrong decisions, this is also part of the learning process to be a businessman.


Just as a side note, I wonder how he will react on warranty claims of former customers, something such ˋbusinessmanˋ usually never think about. Just interested in making some easy money (in this case after school).
Only want to take the profit, but not willing to take the risks and consequences as a businessman.

Think about with which people you might want to do business when trading within such a forum ....

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 08:26 AM
The bottom line is that the buyer paid for a pen that they don't have, and they contributed to this result by providing an incorrect address. The seller should refund the buyer's payment less the actual cost of shipping.


I kind of disagree with this. The key question is why the pen got returned? Is it because the seller sent a defect/damaged pen? Or it's because the buyer gave the wrong address and the person at the door simply refused to accept something they never bought? It's really not clear to me why the seller should take all the blame/loss. Even in the case when someone received a defect/damaged item from Amazon, Amazon will refund only after received the returned item from the buyer. In most situations, it's the buyer's responsibility to ensure the returned item got delivered safely when the seller accept the the return. If the item gets lost/damaged during the return process, I think the seller has the right to get compensation for the loss.

This case is a little more than that. The actual buyer doesn't take part in that decision making because the address is wrong and he's not the person at that door. Whoever lives in that wrong address decided that it's a good idea to just let the package returned. Of course, they shouldn't take any responsibility for the lost package. Then who should be? There are two different choices:

1. The buyer should. The return part of the shipping will not happen if the buyer gave the correct address. And it's more or less like the situation, when the buyer doesn't want whatever he bought and decided to just return using the original shipping method. I think it's pretty clear there's a causation. And in the case when the buyer decides he doesn't want the pen, it's the buyer's responsibility to communicate with the seller and make sure the returned package arrives nice and safe.
2. The seller should. The seller claimed to have the pen and later said he never had it. I don't think it's unreasonable to suspect the seller did this only to trick the buyer to close the Paypal claim. And it's a bad practice, almost fraudulent. Yes, the seller didn't initiate the sell trying to scam the buyer but during the second phase of this sale, the seller might lie to the buyer, trying to close the Paypal claim.

I think this case is pretty complicated and both sides made mistakes that caused the lost of the package so both sides should take responsibility for the result. I think USPS international comes with $200 insurance by default so the seller should file a claim for that.

Wuddus
April 19th, 2018, 08:50 AM
What a mess!

I think both sides owe each other apologies, not insults and accusations. Both entered into this with goodwill, but they both let each other down.

However, to sum this up, the seller dutifully sent the package to the address he was asked to send it to. That was what they entered into a contract to do, and they did it. The cause of everything that followed, was that the buyer gave the wrong address. It is not the seller's fault that the buyer wasn't at that dress to receive it. If the person at that wrong address had accepted the package and was now going about his day with a very nice free pen, would the buyer still think it's the sellers duty to fix it? I don't think it should be.

However, the seller didn't follow this up properly either. This is now a complete shambles, but still fixable. I'm sure that if both parties work together as they should have done before, this debacle can be tidied up fairly simply. Either locate the package and getting it to where it should have been addressed originally, or claim for the lost goods and reach an amicable conclusion based on the settlement, and apportion any losses accordingly. As part of this, both parties should admit they screwed up big time.

comixfan
April 19th, 2018, 09:18 AM
WWJJD? (What would Judge Judy do?)

Chrissy
April 19th, 2018, 09:28 AM
What does the seller get, since he no longer has the pen he'd further discounted as a favor to the buyer? Did the buyer, trying to keep his costs low, accept the risk of cheaper postage without insurance?
If the seller didn't select an insured service that allows him to claim from USPS because they lost his parcel, then he suffers the loss.

Chrissy
April 19th, 2018, 09:30 AM
WWJJD? (What would Judge Judy do?)
She would give the buyer his money back. Seller has the responsibility of getting the goods to the buyer. Yes it's a mess because of the wrong address, but if they don't get there for whatever reason, buyer gets his money back.

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 09:32 AM
What does the seller get, since he no longer has the pen he'd further discounted as a favor to the buyer? Did the buyer, trying to keep his costs low, accept the risk of cheaper postage without insurance?
If the seller didn't select an insured service that allows him to claim from USPS because they lost his parcel, then he suffers the loss.
The package wasn't lost on its way to the buyer but was lost on its way back to the seller, which the buyer should take responsibility for because the entire return process was caused by the fact that buyer provided the wrong address.

Such a return trip was neither expected by the seller nor the USPS.

Chrissy
April 19th, 2018, 09:33 AM
What does the seller get, since he no longer has the pen he'd further discounted as a favor to the buyer? Did the buyer, trying to keep his costs low, accept the risk of cheaper postage without insurance?
If the seller didn't select an insured service that allows him to claim from USPS because they lost his parcel, then he suffers the loss.
The package wasn't lost on its way to the buyer but was lost on its way back to the seller, which the buyer should take responsibility for because the entire return process was caused by the fact that buyer provided the wrong address.

Such a return trip was neither expected by the seller nor the USPS.
Doesn't matter. Doesn't mean that USPS can keep the parcel somewhere and claim it's lost without paying out to the sender. USPS has the parcel and the buyer certainly can't get it back from them.

If this had been filed as a PayPal claim, all they would look at was "does the tracking show that the item has been delivered to the buyer." If not, they will find for the buyer.

The wrong address and lost return make it much more complicated, but don't remove the seller's responsibility.

Pterodactylus
April 19th, 2018, 09:33 AM
What does the seller get, since he no longer has the pen he'd further discounted as a favor to the buyer? Did the buyer, trying to keep his costs low, accept the risk of cheaper postage without insurance?
If the seller didn't select an insured service that allows him to claim from USPS because they lost his parcel, then he suffers the loss.
The package wasn't lost on its way to the buyer but was lost on its way back to the seller, which the buyer should take responsibility for because the entire return process was caused by the fact that buyer provided the wrong address.

Such a return trip was neither expected by the seller nor the USPS.

Irrelevant where it got lost, transportation risk is sellers risk.

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 09:41 AM
What does the seller get, since he no longer has the pen he'd further discounted as a favor to the buyer? Did the buyer, trying to keep his costs low, accept the risk of cheaper postage without insurance?
If the seller didn't select an insured service that allows him to claim from USPS because they lost his parcel, then he suffers the loss.
The package wasn't lost on its way to the buyer but was lost on its way back to the seller, which the buyer should take responsibility for because the entire return process was caused by the fact that buyer provided the wrong address.

Such a return trip was neither expected by the seller nor the USPS.
Doesn't matter. Doesn't mean that USPS can keep the parcel somewhere and claim it's lost.

If this had been filed as a PayPal claim, all they would look at was "does the tracking show that the item has been delivered to the buyer" If not, they will find for the buyer.

The wrong address and lost return make it much more complicated, but don't remove the seller's responsibility.

No it doesn't. So I said, the key problem is why the package was returned. Who made that decision? Is it someone at the door or it's the postoffice? And why the person at that address or the post office made that decision? Is it caused by the mistake of the buyer or the seller? Paypal claim system is far from the most equal sale agreement between buyer and seller.

Dhruv
April 19th, 2018, 09:45 AM
Irrelevant where it got lost, transportation risk is sellers risk.

Nope. You're wrong.

1. It shouldn't have been sent back in the first place. Buyer's fault that it was sent back.
2. Seller is only responsible for the shipping from his address to the PayPal registered address, which he dutifully did.
If it is sent back, then it is buyer's responsibility.

Honestly, I think everyone is just going on and on about it only because they have grossly unfair PayPal claim. Remove that and then try to see things. The whole mess was created by the buyer, and he should take responsibility for it. At least give your own address correctly. And even if you shifted to a new address during the transit period, then you, at your own end should make arrangements with your postal service to have the package routed to your new address.
This is what we do here. I'll be shifting to a new address in the next 2 months and have informed all the neighbours and the postman to call me and let me know if there are any letters addressed to me.
Of course, there won't be any packages because I am not going to be doing any purchases in the next 4 months until I figure out which all websites I have to change my address at.

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 09:55 AM
For one example why PayPal or Ebay claim system is seriously unfair for the seller: suppose you bought a pen and immediately regret it, you can simply bend the pen into two pieces when it arrives together with the packaging and then file a claim through Paypal, saying that the pen was damaged during the shipping process. It's almost certainly you will get refunded because it's impossible for the seller to have a picture of the pen, safely delivered to your hands, unless he's your neighbor. And of course, seller should take the risk of transportation.

Don't ask me hwo I know and I agree that we should really think about this aside from the Paypal claim system.

Pterodactylus
April 19th, 2018, 09:58 AM
The package was always in the hands of the from the sellers contracted transportation company.

Imo it would have been different if somebody at the destination address signed for it and took it.
Then the risk would have been transferred to the buyer, and the buyer would had bad cards.


This never happened. The from the seller contracted transport carrier still had the package in his responibility, why should the risk should have been moved to the buyer? Can’t see it.

Would be the same if the carrier couldn’t found the destination address (don‘t laugh such things happens) and the package returns to the seller, still sellers Problem if it got lost.

Or if the carrier could not deliver it because no one was at home (one or more times) and it goes back to the sender and got lost, also sellers problem.

Chrissy
April 19th, 2018, 10:17 AM
The seller sent the package to the address that the buyer had on his PayPal account. Sadly, that turned out to be an incorrect address, so the package was refused at the address, and was still in the hands of the sellers chosen carrier.

The seller's chosen carrier failed to successfully return the package to the sender within the terms of their contractual agreement which are to either deliver it or if unsuccessful, to return it to sender.

The buyer gets his money back because he doesn't have the item he has paid for.

The seller claims from his carrier and either gets back his original parcel or some monetary insurance value. If there is a shortfall he has self-insured the rest by his choice of carriage.

That's how contract law works. You can argue over the rest until the cows come home.

Dhruv
April 19th, 2018, 10:19 AM
Why did you buy the item, bother with the negotiations when you weren't going to sign for it?

Like I said, you need to make your own arrangements if you are going to move to a new address instead of relying on others to make it work for you. It was your decision to move, not the seller's. He cannot and should be made to accept responsibility for something that the buyer was supposed to do.

As for seller's responsibility, he shipped it to the PayPal address and even a delivery was attempted, but it was the buyer because of whom the delivery could not be made. The buyer obstructed the seller from fulfilling his responsibility.

mhosea
April 19th, 2018, 10:28 AM
The key question is why the pen got returned?

I think that's the opposite of a key question. So what if the package was returned? If it had been returned successfully we wouldn't be having this discussion. It's not even a key question why the package was lost.

The key question is when has the seller fulfilled his obligation to deliver the item. Some argue, apparently, that he has done so merely by bouncing the package off the address that he was given. Again, my sympathies are with the seller on this point, and perhaps the buyer feels that way as well. For sure the seller is entitled to keep the shipping charge associated with the misadventure. But generally the package makes its way back to the shipper in that case, and the larger matter has been obfuscated by the loss of the package. If the shipper had purchased insurance for their shipment, would they still be entitled to keep both the insurance settlement and the purchase price? Suppose the seller has put their return address inside the package (which all shippers should do), and he is ultimately reunited with his pen and can no longer contact the buyer at that time. What then?

Insurance insures the shipper. The shipper purchases it, not the buyer, and the shipper is the principal one insured by it. There is no choice that the buyer can make in shipping that is not implicitly underwritten by the shipper, so if you're a shipper, don't agree to options that you are uncomfortable with, at least not without getting the buyer to agree explicitly to accept the liability associated with that choice. Even then, I would strongly advise against it.

The only way I can see to twist it around so that the buyer is on the hook for the bulk of the loss is to argue that, once the item reached the provided address and began its return journey, the roles of shipper and receiver, seller and buyer, were instantly reversed. I don't see that reversal happening without the package having been received at that address. Merely arriving at that address in control of the carrier without having been received at that address doesn't do it.

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 11:32 AM
Of course it's a key question. Your argument makes close to 0 sense because ypu are assuming that the carrier transport the package to the requested address and then decided it's a good idea to ship it back without contacting anyone at that address. I don't understand where on earth this is a common practice. It's definitely beneficial for the post office to transport twice the distance and charging the same price. The common practice in my understanding is put it right there and mark as delivered. Or in the case when a signature is required, try redeliver it at a different time or leave a slip and ask recipient to pick up at local post office.

Something happened between attempted delivery to the requested address and the package got returned.

mrincon
April 19th, 2018, 12:12 PM
Actually, mmd, this has actually happened to me - where the package makes it to my general area, then it's not delivered (just appears on tracking at the local post office) and is then sent back. No notification, no nothing. AND it was the correct address! Mistakes happen at the USPS. Even Amazon has had lost packages, tons of them.

I think we can all agree:
- Buyer provided wrong address, so they are at fault
- Seller didn't buy insurance, so they are at fault

The penalty for providing the wrong address is usually you pay the shipping cost that is wasted.
The penalty for not insuring your OWN goods (because legally, until it's delivered it's the seller's goods), is that you eat the loss.

That's if I were judge Judy.

If I were the buyer, and the seller had been kind/nice to me, I would offer to eat some of the cost. I've done once when an item arrived damaged, but it's certainly not my obligation by any stretch. I did it because the guy was nice, and we are fellow enthusiasts and only human.

The buyer caused a $50 loss in wasted shipping.
But the seller's refusal to buy insurance cost them $300.

It seems to me unfair to saddle the buyer with the entirety of the loss! Even if the buyer wanted to be nice and help offset the loss (out of his humanity), pitching in more than $100 to the seller for the seller's mistake seems excessive.

mhosea
April 19th, 2018, 12:31 PM
Of course it's a key question. Your argument makes close to 0 sense because ypu are assuming that the carrier transport the package to the requested address and then decided it's a good idea to ship it back without contacting anyone at that address.

No. I'm using the parlance of shipping, which gives a definition to "received" and a definition to "refused". My understanding/assumption is that the package was refused at the shipping address, not "received". Apparently, the buyer's mother refused it. My in-laws once did the same with some mail during a confused time in which we were moving and I had temporarily had mail delivered to their address. Ultimately it was my fault for failing to make sure everybody was on the same page. Anyway, refusing mail produces a technically different situation than receiving it and subsequently sending it back. In the case of being "refused", the carrier is still operating under the original contract with the seller, i.e. the seller remains the "shipper". In the latter case, there would be a new shipping contract, which would most likely make the buyer the new "shipper".

The carrier actually lost the package. Who were they working for when they lost it?

RocketRyan
April 19th, 2018, 01:01 PM
So who has the money, and who has the pen?

Pterodactylus
April 19th, 2018, 02:24 PM
So who has the money, and who has the pen?

Buyer has no money and no pen.....

Chrissy
April 19th, 2018, 02:27 PM
There are probably many reasons why a carrier could fail to successfully deliver a parcel.

For example: (like here) the recipient makes a mistake and gives the wrong address, the sender makes a mistake and sends to the wrong address, the carrier makes a mistake and delivers to the wrong address, the carrier has the parcel stolen out of his vehicle, the recipient isn't at home to accept delivery and the package gets returned to the carrier's office, the recipient is in hospital, arrested by police, on holiday, out of the Country looking after a sick relative etc. etc. Whatever has happened, the recipient never makes contact with the carrier as requested, and he never gets the package redelivered.

When delivery can't be made, for whatever reason, the carrier then is contracted to return the parcel to the sender. He can't just keep it or say it's lost and bear no responsibility. He either has to deliver it to the recipient or return it to the sender. If he doesn't do either of those he is liable.

So the carrier has this parcel. The sender needs to get it from the carrier. Then he will have his parcel back. or if the carrier can't find the parcel, they have to pay out the insurance on it.

The sender is already covered by his agent, the carrier. The recipient can only claim from the sender. So the sender has to make the recipient whole. He gets made whole (or partially whole depending on the insured cover) by the carrier.

The carrier currently has possession of the pen. He needs to return it to the seller. Simple.

Dhruv
April 19th, 2018, 03:01 PM
Somebody correct me if I am wrong, if you file a claim and then close it, you can't dispute that transaction again. Is this correct?

Chrissy
April 19th, 2018, 03:50 PM
Somebody correct me if I am wrong, if you file a claim and then close it, you can't dispute that transaction again. Is this correct?
He may not be able to dispute it with PayPal if a) he's too late and b) he already opened a dispute then closed it.

He can sue in the Small Claims court though

Dhruv
April 19th, 2018, 03:55 PM
He may not be able to dispute it with PayPal if a) he's too late and b) he already opened a dispute then closed it.

He can sue in the Small Claims court though

Don't they have to be in the same country to do that? Or does the jurisdiction of the small claims court extend to the international territory?

katerchen
April 19th, 2018, 03:56 PM
https://i1.wp.com/gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Eating-Popcorn-Soda.gif?zoom=3&resize=320%2C179&ssl=1

Chrissy
April 19th, 2018, 04:03 PM
He may not be able to dispute it with PayPal if a) he's too late and b) he already opened a dispute then closed it.

He can sue in the Small Claims court though

Don't they have to be in the same country to do that? Or does the jurisdiction of the small claims court extend to the international territory?

Probably they do have to be in the same Country. After all of this long rambling thread I momentarily forgot the buyer was in Europe.

Dhruv
April 19th, 2018, 04:09 PM
Probably they do have to be in the same Country. After all of this long rambling thread I momentarily forgot the buyer was in Europe.

Well... have fun everyone. :haha: :haha:

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 05:21 PM
I don't disagree that seller has responsibility but if the seller gave a full refund minus the shipping cost, the seller will now be in the situation that he has no pen and money. And this is caused by the fact that the buyer provided the wrong address and very likely buyers mom rejected the package. I don't see what else seller could do to avoid that so I don't think it's fair.

And it doesn't have to be like that because the package is indeed insured. Priority mail international includes $200 insurance by itself.

"Priority Mail International shipments containing merchandise are insured against loss, damage, or missing contents up to $200 at no additional charge. Priority Mail International shipments containing non-negotiable documents are insured against loss, damage, or missing contents up to $100 for document reconstruction at no additional charge."

Once the seller claims that, the remaining loss is just about $150 and I don't think it's unfair to just split that evenly......

mhosea
April 19th, 2018, 05:42 PM
And this is caused by the fact that the buyer provided the wrong address

By the same logic, the seller would still have the pen if he'd not decided to sell it. Therefore, it's the seller's fault that he doesn't have the pen. The package is lost because the carrier lost it. The buyer did not lose it, and the seller did not lose it. The carrier lost it, and the contract law unfolds from there.

rubendh
April 19th, 2018, 06:27 PM
Somebody correct me if I am wrong, if you file a claim and then close it, you can't dispute that transaction again. Is this correct?
He may not be able to dispute it with PayPal if a) he's too late and b) he already opened a dispute then closed it.

He can sue in the Small Claims court though

Yes, the seller lied to me and said he has the pen back and sitting in his house. That lie made me close the dispute and i am not able to reopen it.

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 06:28 PM
And this is caused by the fact that the buyer provided the wrong address

By the same logic, the seller would still have the pen if he'd not decided to sell it. Therefore, it's the seller's fault that he doesn't have the pen. The package is lost because the carrier lost it. The buyer did not lose it, and the seller did not lose it. The carrier lost it, and the contract law unfolds from there.

Your logic is just totally chaotic. The decision to sell the pen never caused the pen to get lost. There's no causation whatsoever. If the seller sell to someone locally by local pickup, the possibility that the pen got lost in transportation is almost 0. It's the decision to sell to this particular buyer who provided the wrong address caused the pen to be lost.

The contract law gives only partial insight in this situation. The situation is similar to a car accident caused by a drunk driver driving a car with defect brake. Yes, the car is sold to the driver so the contract still holds between the driver and the car manufacturer. What you are saying is essentially the manufacturer should take all the blame no matter what because the brake is defect. However, the truth is if the driver was not drunk, he might react earlier and the not so good brake might have a chance to prevent the accident. It's more complicated than what you think and to judge such an accident, you have to take into account multiple factors. For instance, does the driver know the problem way before the accident and ignored all the maintenance request from the car manufacturer? If the driver was not drunk and react like a skilled driver, will the defect brake be enough to prevent the accident? I don't think it's as simple as you think.

Also your "in the same logic" is basic saying such an accident will not happen if the manufacturer didn't decide to sell this car in the first place. The decision to sell the car never caused the accident. It's the decision to sell the car to this particular drunk driver caused the accident. But how could the manufacturer know if this buyer will drive when drunk?

In conclusion, the manufacturer is responsible for the defect brake; the driver is responsible for being drunk. Both should be responsible for the accident and how the responsibility splits is not that simple.

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 06:41 PM
And who made the call to extend the contract between USPS and the seller? Both of them expected the contract to end once the package reached the requested address safely. Whoever at the wrong address decided it's a good idea to send the package back to seller and extended the contract between USPS and the seller. And in fact there's no contract whatsoever. If you take a look at USPS terms, USPS has to right to decide what they want to do with the undeliverable mail as authorized for the particular class of mail. They even have the right to just treat it as dead mail.

To clarify, I'm not assuming the mail was rejected by the buyer's mom and not trying to release seller's responsibility. I mean seriously, my mom will at least call me if she gets a mail with my name on it if not just sign for it. Something happened between the attempted delivery and the package got returned. We don't know what it is and frankly, lying to buyer to get Paypal claim closed is pretty bad by itself. Seller should take part of the blame even just for that behavior.......

mhosea
April 19th, 2018, 08:04 PM
And this is caused by the fact that the buyer provided the wrong address

By the same logic, the seller would still have the pen if he'd not decided to sell it. Therefore, it's the seller's fault that he doesn't have the pen. The package is lost because the carrier lost it. The buyer did not lose it, and the seller did not lose it. The carrier lost it, and the contract law unfolds from there.

But how could the manufacturer know if this buyer will drive when drunk?

Indeed, how could either the buyer or the seller know that the parcel would be lost if it were returned to sender? Refusal of mail does not cause its loss. That is not a reasonable expectation. It causes it to be returned to sender. If the brakes are defective, and anyone knows of it, they have no reasonable expectation that the brakes are reliable. It's eminently reasonable to expect the car to run into something eventually. If a the driver is drunk, those of us who are not drunk can have no reasonable expectation that he will be able to avoid an accident if pressed. It's eminently reasonable to expect the drunk to get into some kind of accident eventually. But here we're not talking about running the pony express through "Injun Terrritory". In this case, both parties had a reasonable expectation that the item would be successfully returned to the sender after it was refused. Neither party had a reasonable expectation that the address error would cause the pen to be lost forever. The sender believed it would be returned so fervently, in fact, that he jumped the gun in assuming that it would be so. It was not unreasonable for him to think so. I don't know what percentage of parcels get lost, but it's pretty low, and it's pretty random. There's not much you can do either to predict or prevent the loss. That's why if you're concerned about the possibility, you buy insurance.

You seem to be hypothesizing that, had the buyer provided the correct address, the parcel would not have been lost. Let's suppose that the buyer had provided his new address. What evidence do we have that the parcel would not have been lost on the outbound trip? This was not tested. Different address, maybe different sorting machines, especially near the end of the journey. The trial is different. The only thing we actually know is that the parcel arrived at the wrong address.

All we've got is a sequence of events, and you are arguing that if we alter the sequence of events in one particular place which happens to correspond to what should have been a $50 mistake on the buyer's part, the loss would not have occurred, hence it is causative. But this methodology applies equally to an infinite number of preceding events that would have altered the scenario enough to reach a different outcome.

mhosea
April 19th, 2018, 08:55 PM
And who made the call to extend the contract between USPS and the seller?

No extension required.

https://pe.usps.com/text/imm/immc7_024.htm



771.1 General Procedure
Items that originate in the United States and are found to be undeliverable in the destination country will generally be returned to the U.S. sender.

771.2 Exceptions
Ordinary (unregistered) items of printed matter, other than books, are not returned, unless the sender has requested their return. Parcels whose customs declaration requests abandonment in event of nondelivery are usually not returned.

Chrissy
April 19th, 2018, 09:51 PM
Somebody correct me if I am wrong, if you file a claim and then close it, you can't dispute that transaction again. Is this correct?
He may not be able to dispute it with PayPal if a) he's too late and b) he already opened a dispute then closed it.

Yes, the seller lied to me and said he has the pen back and sitting in his house. That lie made me close the dispute and i am not able to reopen it.

You could always try going back to PayPal, and asking if they can help. Alternatively, can you go to your credit card company and tell them you don't have the goods?

Farmboy
April 19th, 2018, 10:16 PM
I'm struggling with this. I was left with just ice around page 3 and had to get a refill. I'm down to ice again.

What happens when the Buyer declines insured shipping? AND the package goes missing...

OR

What happens when the Buyer asks for insurance of $50 on a package worth $500 to avoid customs fees? AND the package goes missing...

I'm going to go dilute my ice.

rubendh
April 19th, 2018, 10:21 PM
What happens when the Buyer asks for insurance of $50 on a package worth $500 to avoid customs fees? AND the package goes missing...


You can't avoid custom fees and I don't think that insuring a package has to do anything with custom fees in fact.
Insuring is (what I think) to mitigate the cost when a package is lost. Depending on the value of what the seller insured the package for he or she can get that money back when it happens.

The seller delibiratly chose to not insure it, probably to cut costs.

Dhruv
April 19th, 2018, 10:27 PM
Yes, the seller lied to me and said he has the pen back and sitting in his house. That lie made me close the dispute and i am not able to reopen it.

Well, now it's beyond any sort of help. PayPal won't help anymore because that is the clause of their contract.
All of us can bark here for as long as we like but it is not going to change anything. You are not going to get the money back, and you are probably not going to get the pen either.

Farmboy
April 19th, 2018, 10:31 PM
What happens when the Buyer asks for insurance of $50 on a package worth $500 to avoid customs fees? AND the package goes missing...


You can't avoid custom fees and I don't think that insuring a package has to do anything with custom fees in fact.
Insuring is (what I think) to mitigate the cost when a package is lost. Depending on the value of what the seller insured the package for he or she can get that money back when it happens.

The seller delibiratly chose to not insure it, probably to cut costs.

Not what I asked. If you insure a package for $500 you better declare that on the customs form. If you declare a customs value of $50 and insure it for more you will only collect the $50.

I asked what happens when a buyer asks for no insurance or asks that the value be declared below the selling cost AND the pen goes missing.

kirchh
April 19th, 2018, 10:58 PM
...so I lied, yes, and I told Ruben that I had the pen when in fact I did not have it physically in my possession...

Are you intentionally leaving out the fact that you intentionally lied so that the clock would run out on a PayPal claim, and that after that happened, you admitted it and laughed about it?

That seems important. Why would you write such an extensive, detailed chronology, yet leave out that crucial event?

--Daniel

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 11:00 PM
Your logic is a total mystery to me. We are never talking about causality of events, we are talking about the causality between mistakes and bad consequences. Causality of events is not even meaningful. Who's mistake results in the undesirable results?

The seller made no mistake till the point when the package was refused. He send the package to the requested address once received payment. That's it. Sure, there's no full insurance but choosing to take that risk is not a mistake. The seller choose to believe that USPS will transport the package safely to the requested address. In the case when item is damaged or lost on its way to the requested address, I believe he will just take the loss. As we all know, the package was transported to the requested address and as expected by the seller safely.

However, the seller miscalculated. I bet he never thought the package could get returned and he thought that way because he was misinformed. He was informed by the buyer, that's the correct address. Of course, a package could also get returned even if it's the correct address but I don't think it's rediculous to say, the wrong address makes the risk of getting returned much higher. The risk of not having a full insurance ended up much higher than what the seller was expecting because it has to travel twice the distance and resulted in the loss of the package. That's the story.

As an analogue, the seller bought a lottery, saying there's a 50% chance to win. However, he's misinformed and the actual winning rate is just 25%. This is clearly false advertising and fraudulent. I believe the buyer doesn't really mean to diminish the seller but this mistake boosted the risk. As we saw, it's exactly the extra risk created by the misinformation resulted in the loss of the package.

I don't see how you get the number $50. To me it sounds like the situation when a driver rushes through the red light and hit a person and the driver claims that he should only be fined for $200 for rushing through the red light. If the driver's mistake does not cause serious result, it's $200 just to give a warning. If there's a bad result, it could be anything. On the other hand, if the driver drives safely and a person jumps out of the bush and gets hit by the car, the driver only has miniml responsibility. Sure, the event that driver drives the car partially caused the bad consequence, but the driver made little mistake.

It's the causality between mistake and bad consequence that matters. Both sides made mistake and you don't have to agree with me on whose mistake caused the bad result. I just don't think it's as simply as what you claim: buyer only made a $50 mistake and with the insurance included, the mistakes worth about $150 in total in the best case.

As what I have seen, the seller has been considerate about the pricing and that also affected his decision to take the risk. The buyer misinformed the seller and resulted in an increased risk and the increased part resulted in the loss of the package. The seller lied to the buyer to get the Paypal case closed. Both sides made mistakes back and forth and I think there are still plenty space for negotiation if both sides are willing to.

Claiming buyer only made a $50 mistake is not consistent with the fact and is also not beneficial to get them through this unpleasant experience. It's a $150 loss at best and $350 loss at worst. I don't feel like it's a life threatening problem to either side. I believe it could get sorted out if both sides just chill down and be a little more considerate. That's it.

Dhruv
April 19th, 2018, 11:03 PM
Not what I asked. If you insure a package for $500 you better declare that on the customs form. If you declare a customs value of $50 and insure it for more you will only collect the $50.

I asked what happens when a buyer asks for no insurance or asks that the value be declared below the selling cost AND the pen goes missing.

These people (who are saying that it's seller's fault) would probably still hold the seller responsible for any loss in transit even if they expressly asked the seller to declare below the actual value.

But if you ask the seller to value below the actual cost, then you would be responsible in case the item goes missing in transit.

In any case, a well deserved outcome.

mhosea
April 19th, 2018, 11:05 PM
What happens when the Buyer declines insured shipping? AND the package goes missing...


In order to give the buyer the option of declining the insurance and be off the hook for the lost item as seller, you're going to have to be careful about where you do business and how you receive payment. For example,

Ebay: "If a buyer doesn't receive their item, they're entitled to a refund unless you can provide tracking information showing that it was delivered."
PayPal: "If an order doesn’t arrive or it doesn’t match the description, we’ll reimburse the full cost of eligible purchases plus original shipping." (guess where the funds for the reimbursement come from).
Visa: (dispute condition 13.1, cardholder claims merchandise not received) Provide documentation to prove that the cardholder or authorized person received the merchandise or
services as agreed. (else the chargeback stands)

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 11:21 PM
What happens when the Buyer declines insured shipping? AND the package goes missing...


In order to give the buyer the option of declining the insurance and be off the hook for the lost item as seller, you're going to have to be careful about where you do business and how you receive payment. For example,

Ebay: "If a buyer doesn't receive their item, they're entitled to a refund unless you can provide tracking information showing that it was delivered."
PayPal: "If an order doesn’t arrive or it doesn’t match the description, we’ll reimburse the full cost of eligible purchases plus original shipping." (guess where the funds for the reimbursement come from).
Visa: (dispute condition 13.1, cardholder claims merchandise not received) Provide documentation to prove that the cardholder or authorized person received the merchandise or
services as agreed. (else the chargeback stands)

Sorry to let you down and I guess you have to be careful about where you buy things. If a buyer refuses a package, all buyers protection will be nullified. At least thats the Ebay and Paypal rule. So I doubt, even if a Paypal case was opened till the end, the buyer will get the money back. Refusing a package is clearly not not receiving it and is also not not as described because the buyer never opened it. Also, in the case of not as described, the buyer has to provide the proof of delivery for the returned package to ge refund.

mhosea
April 19th, 2018, 11:27 PM
Your logic is a total mystery to me.

Yeah, no kidding.

But moving on, there is still a possibility that the pen will be found and returned to the seller. It doesn't seem beyond the realm of possibility if it still has a tracking number that shows it heading off to the USPS dead mail facility. The $50 thing was a very rough guess of what the cost would have been to the seller if the USPS hadn't lost the package. I gather the difference in our positions is that I think the seller is liable for the loss and the buyer is not, while you believe both are jointly liable somehow. Anyway, I believe it was the buyer who tossed out the $50 figure. Take it with a grain of salt. It may be low because if the package hadn't been lost, the seller would have been charged return shipping. So perhaps it should be doubled. The idea would be that if the parcel is located and returned some months hence, the seller will break even, as they will have the pen back and have been reimbursed for any of the postage expenses associated with the misadventure.

mhosea
April 19th, 2018, 11:30 PM
What happens when the Buyer declines insured shipping? AND the package goes missing...


In order to give the buyer the option of declining the insurance and be off the hook for the lost item as seller, you're going to have to be careful about where you do business and how you receive payment. For example,

Ebay: "If a buyer doesn't receive their item, they're entitled to a refund unless you can provide tracking information showing that it was delivered."
PayPal: "If an order doesn’t arrive or it doesn’t match the description, we’ll reimburse the full cost of eligible purchases plus original shipping." (guess where the funds for the reimbursement come from).
Visa: (dispute condition 13.1, cardholder claims merchandise not received) Provide documentation to prove that the cardholder or authorized person received the merchandise or
services as agreed. (else the chargeback stands)

Sorry to let you down and I guess you have to be careful about where you buy things. If a buyer refuses a package, all buyers protection will be nullified. At least thats the Ebay and Paypal rule. So I doubt, even if a Paypal case was opened till the end, the buyer will get the money back. Refusing a package is clearly not not receiving it and is also not not as described because the buyer never opened it. Also, in the case of not as described, the buyer has to provide the proof of delivery for the returned package to ge refund.

Where in Farmboy's hypothetical question was it predicated that the item was refused? Did I miss it, or did you misread it?

mmd
April 19th, 2018, 11:42 PM
I didn't misread it. I just want to point out keep listing these policies will not bring you anywhere. I don't think FarmBoy asked about how Ebay or Paypal or Visa will handle this. In my understanding, his question is about who should be responsible for the loss. First, these policies don't work as you might imagine. Second, buying and selling on a forum goes way beyond buyer's protection or seller's protection. I trust my buyer will not intentionally damage the pen. Otherwise, there are enumorous ways they could screw me up. And I trust the seller will send me the pen as described. Otherwise, I have no confidence in buying. And when something undesirable happens, we can sort it out without filing a claim through Paypal or Ebay.

rubendh
April 19th, 2018, 11:43 PM
It's the causality between mistake and bad consequence that matters. Both sides made mistake and you don't have to agree with me on whose mistake caused the bad result. I just don't think it's as simply as what you claim: buyer only made a $50 mistake and with the insurance included, the mistakes worth about $150 in total in the best case.

As what I have seen, the seller has been considerate about the pricing and that also affected his decision to take the risk. The buyer misinformed the seller and resulted in an increased risk and the increased part resulted in the loss of the package. The seller lied to the buyer to get the Paypal case closed. Both sides made mistakes back and forth and I think there are still plenty space for negotiation if both sides are willing to.

Claiming buyer only made a $50 mistake is not consistent with the fact and is also not beneficial to get them through this unpleasant experience. It's a $150 loss at best and $350 loss at worst. I don't feel like it's a life threatening problem to either side. I believe it could get sorted out if both sides just chill down and be a little more considerate. That's it.

Thanks for the imput everybody - from both sides.

Please do remember. On january 4th Jason told me 'Hey Ruben, I got your pen sitting in my home right now. There currently is a snow storm going on and I'll reship it to you asap.' (https://i.imgur.com/5YLClNl.png). This was his last thing I ever heard from him. I constantly asked for updates and he simply went full silent and ignorant.

Now that we come to a conclusion that he had not the pen, he is not a scammer as I first thought. (I believe you would think that too when somebody goes silent after saying the above).
Anyway. He is not, and I'm sorry for calling him out on that initially. I feel I need to say that.

I agree that this in this situation we both made mistakes, and that we both made a 150 usd hit on this.
I hope the Jason sees it this way aswell, and we can divide the loss that way, solving the problem and moving on.

I'm getting exhausted of discuting and hope to settle it this way. If you're reading this Jason (seller) I'd like to hear your input.

Pterodactylus
April 20th, 2018, 12:01 AM
Despite the fact that I see the seller clearly responsible to return the money as the transport risk was his risk.
Untaken that this would be a inconvenient lesson to learn as a business man.

This fine after school business man seems to keep the paid money and will most likely claim from the carrier the 200 dollar insurance as a bonus (as we learned that such international packages are insured up to this amount).

So take care with which people you make business, especially on such a forum and if they are in a different country than you.
Don‘t expect service, warranty or any other type of customer care from such buys.
Don‘t do it if you can not afford a complete or partial loss.
Donˋt do it if you don‘t want to take at least some risks and be aware of the risks dealing with unknown people in foreign countries.

As I previously said I would always prefer a selling platform instead of a forum because of the transparency, the platform support, the additional possibilities in case of a problem.

Buying something in a forum is comparable to buying a foreign newspaper read the small advertisements and order from there.

Many of the sellers here are no business man and as we see also do not act as business man.
Many are not aware of their liabilities (duties, risks, warranty,.....as all business man have in all countries).
It will be difficult to persue a law suit in case of problems, you can’t even be sure to have the right identity of the seller.

And these sellers are aware of this and count on this.
The anonymity of an forum is ideal for them.

I don‘t say that most of them want scam people per default, but in case of troubles often problems start as they do not want to take the responsibilities and obligations of selling something (just the profit).

If you still want to take the risk, never trust what the seller is telling you in case of problems.
Don‘t wait too long to get your money back.

Always choose payment methods where you have a good chance to get your money back
Do not trust what the seller tells you, in case of troubles or if something take longer open a case at your payment provider and get your money back, never close a case before all problems are sorted out.

Consider that you often deal with people which are not real business man.
People often just try to make some easy bucks trading with pens. (Living room traders).

I would always recommend to buy from a big selling platform instead of here.
There you still can run into troubles but have much more possibilities to stay save (seller profile, feedback, tool/platform support, transparency, customer feedback,...)

Farmboy
April 20th, 2018, 12:23 AM
I've lost track of who sold what to whom and my ice is gone.

I like the seller/buyer split the difference both admitting fault.

If there is an insurance payout then both buyer and seller should also split that.

Should the pen turn up I'd advise buyer and seller to return any funds from an insurance payout so there is a chance Karma doesn't bite anyone.

Whom ever winds up with the pen if it is found should return the split cost to the other party.

Likely worth mentioning that both buyer and seller have done nothing to enhance their buyer/seller relationship in future business deals with other members on said board.

Problem solved? I think so. Buyer has stepped up now we need the seller to step up and refund half. Please keep us posted.

In both scenarios FarmBoy posed he was ignoring PayPal, eBay, and any other constraints that we can dream up. He just wants to know if the seller eats it or the buyer eats it. Assume the agreement is documented in an email.

mmd
April 20th, 2018, 12:39 AM
Well, most of the time I find forum members easier to deal with and the buying/selling process is much more interactive than say Ebay. Sellers know more about their pens, have more detailed descriptions, more open to trade and reasonable offers...... Buyers know better about what they exactly want/will get, ask more questions before buying, say kind words if they like the pen...... It's just totally different from Ebay or Goulet or whatever professional businessman out there. All systems have holes and can be taken advantage of if you really want to. It's ultimately just your preference plus trust.

The whole fountain pen thing is a hobby for me. It's not a job, even the opposite in some sense. It's not always about just getting the best deal with the best buyers protection or selling at the highest possible price. Trading with other forum members is fun in itself. After all when I recall elementary school time when we traded those collective cards in school, fellow card collectors have stronger impressions than the cards themselves.

jjm5812
April 20th, 2018, 12:46 AM
Thanks for the responses everyone. I think it's fair to see any and all opinions on the matter aside from my own. I did not realize that USPS had an automatic insurance of $200 on international packages as I have never had to file for any claims for any items I've ever shipped. Generally USPS has been very good to me in terms of reliability in getting packages to the directed location on a package - this is experience I've had from shipping hundreds of items aside from fountain pens. In this case I will check and try to file a claim on the USPS package for the $200 insurance or whatever amount I may be entitled to/be able to get back from USPS. The package was declared dead mail though so I am not sure if that effects the outcome of the claim. I have filed multiple Search Claims for the package. Whatever amount I get back can go to the buyer aka Ruben, I have no problems doing that. Had I ever shipped a damaged item, item that was damaged during transport, item that was never delivered to the correct address - I have no qualms or issues offering full refund immediately.

To the user who mentioned I was a seller/businessman selling items to make profit or acting like a business. Unfortunately I am simply a collector looking to share and expand my collection, nothing more. In truth I only ever sell pens at the price I purchased them for if not at a lower price like in this case. I was a student at the time, yes, but I did not spend my time collecting fountain pens to turn a profit but as a hobby and personal interest of mine. The original purchase price of the Stipula on my end was $550 at a local pen shop. I received a discount from retail because I was good friends with the owner and frequently made large purchases there, on top of spending time just to hang out and chat. I sold it to Ruben for $350 instead of $400, so there was not much of a profit there.

I agree certain mistakes were made on both sides and I agree that lying about the pen being in my possession to allow the PayPal case to close 3 hours later was not the best or most honest decision I've made. It was a regretful and desperate decision I made in order to purchase some Christmas presents. I had previously asked Ruben if it was possible for him to close or hold off on the PayPal case until after Christmas.

Maybe as a seller I don't share the same views as everyone else in where the responsibilities and duties of a seller end. Personally I feel I did my best to ensure the package would be delivered to the appropriate address that I was provided according to the buyers PayPal. Unfortunately I was not informed until after the package was delivered to the address, that it was refused by the buyers mother. Going through our conversation again, the buyer said:


Hello



Many thanks for the update!

I'm very excited to receive the pen I've been looking for for a long time :)



However, since I'll be gone (and don't live with my parents anymore), I'd need to know when the pen arrives so my parent can go fetch it!



I'd need to know when the pen arrives, so could you let me know when you receive the 'out for delivery' notification?

In any case the package was delivered to the buyers PayPal address, however, it turns out that his mom received the package and according to the USPS tracking at the time, which I copied into our conversation:

"Your item could not be delivered on October 5, 2017 at 2:05 pm in BELGIUM due to the item being refused by the addressee. It is being returned to the sender."

I am not sure how people will interpret this information. There was signature required on delivery. But I hope this clears up any questions about the delivery of the package to the destination address Ruben provided. To me it also represented the fulfillment of the contract or duties I am morally bound to as a seller. All the extra time and effort I put in over the next 5 months was simply me trying my best to achieve a happy conclusion to the transaction for both the buyer and myself. I would have been happy to know Ruben received and loved the pen he had expressed such interest in. I loved the Stipula, had it custom tuned at a show, and used/owned it for over 4-5 years while babying it. In any situation where the package is damaged during transit, not received as described, or lost in transit to the destination provided to me - I wouldn't hesitate or have any problems refunding, and in fact would probably apologize to the buyer for the trouble. It is possible maybe even probable I may have considered some alternative resolution had my experiences dealing with Ruben been pleasant and respectful instead of increasingly rude and distasteful.

In any case I appreciate everyone who has taken the time to read the thread (it's really long now), and or, post their opinions on the matter. While I may agree or disagree with opinions or statements made, I respect and appreciate the thought and time put into writing them. Ultimately I believe I have spent enough time over this transaction and put it in the past months ago. I just wanted to show and prove that I am not/was not the scammer Rubendh wanted everyone to think I was.

Funnily enough...
Early on in our messages Ruben stated "I've been burned once when I bought something and never got it." Now I am curious as to why that might have been. I clearly remember his PayPal address was same/still incorrect months later when he opened his claim - I suggested again that he change it for future sellers/transactions. I've never had a single issue even with the thousands $$ I've spent over the past 4-5 years on FP forums. Also never had any problems selling and delivering before and after meeting Ruben.

Thanks again everyone.

mhosea
April 20th, 2018, 12:48 AM
In both scenarios FarmBoy posed he was ignoring PayPal, eBay, and any other constraints that we can dream up. He just wants to know if the seller eats it or the buyer eats it. Assume the agreement is documented in an email.

The commentary my response received notwithstanding, my point was not to emphasize those particular entities as constraints, rather to illustrate that the concept of buyer-optional shipping insurance is rather more narrow in scope than you might think, than you probably think. Whether you like it or not, you are dealing with constraints, and ignoring those constraints is likely to earn you a wrong answer to your question. If the package goes missing and never arrives, it matters how you were paid. The most significant infrastructure we have for guaranteed payment in mail order commerce would be credit cards, PayPal, and the like. This infrastructure can perform chargebacks, and they generally require more than just proof of shipping to prevent that from happening in the event that the shipment never arrives. Consequently, in that context, buyer-optional shipping insurance doesn't make any sense because the seller eats it. In other contexts, e.g. cash or check payment in a free-wheeling venue like this one, buyers and sellers can negotiate liability unless one or both are governed by local statutes that would override any agreement they might make. But I think in the absence of an agreement, and payment having been in a cash-equivalent, in the US you would just need to show proof of shipping. In that case I guess the buyer eats it. I'm not aware of a US law that would require a shipper to prove that the shipment actually arrived.

Obviously because of the attempted delivery and refusal, this particular case is less clear than the simple case of a shipment that never arrives.

mmd
April 20th, 2018, 12:55 AM
Hopefully in the very end, we can agree that the saddest thing happened is the missing Stipula.

rubendh
April 20th, 2018, 12:59 AM
again[/U] that he change it for future sellers/transactions. I've never had a single issue even with the thousands $$ I've spent over the past 4-5 years on FP forums. Also never had any problems selling and delivering before and after meeting Ruben.

Thanks again everyone.

- I bought something from Ali Express and never got it. Probably something with the customs.
- As far as I know, I've changed my PayPal adress immediatly when I realised! (I just checked and it's updated, thanks for the heads-up though)
- In this point I'm pretty sure you're not a scammer (although you really made me believe that by saying false things) and I truely believe you that you've successfully spend a lot of money on pens and/or sold many of them.

This, however, does not solve our issue. You meight have read my proposition above (if not I suggest you to) so we can finally move on!

I

Chrissy
April 20th, 2018, 01:49 AM
@jjm5812: You can't just "give up" trying to get the package back or the insurance pay out sorted while your buyer is out $350 and has no pen. You have a responsibility to him to send him his refund now. You've had his money for 6 months and he's had nothing.
@farmboy: It can't be fair for the seller and the buyer to split the insurance pay out as that would mean the seller gets the original $350 payment plus another $100 and the buyer gets $100.
@rubendh: It's very generous of you to offer to accept the $200 insurance payout, and suck up a loss of $150. If I was jjm5812 I would pay that into your PayPal account asap before you change your mind.

jjm5812
April 20th, 2018, 02:32 AM
@jjm5812: You can't just "give up" trying to get the package back or the insurance pay out sorted while your buyer is out $350 and has no pen. You have a responsibility to him to send him his refund now. You've had his money for 6 months and he's had nothing.
@farmboy: It can't be fair for the seller and the buyer to split the insurance pay out as that would mean the seller gets the original $350 payment plus another $100 and the buyer gets $100.
@rubendh: It's very generous of you to offer to accept the $200 insurance payout, and suck up a loss of $150. If I was jjm5812 I would pay that into your PayPal account asap before you change your mind.

I don't think I would classify my actions as "gave up" trying to get the package back. 1) I've been to USPS offices multiple times to try and locate it or ask what could be one. 2) I was not even aware that there was $200 worth of insurance on international packages until a few hours ago and if you're right I will see what I can work out with USPS 3) The package was declared dead mail and sent to the Mail Recovery Center, I've filed USPS Search Claims once a month, every month since. Not much more I can do other than that at this point.

Looking back Ruben said
I'll be gone (and don't live with my parents anymore), I'd need to know when the pen arrives so my parent can go fetch it!
Attempted delivery resulted in: "
"Your item could not be delivered on October 5, 2017 at 2:05 pm in BELGIUM due to the item being refused by the addressee. It is being returned to the sender."
According to Ruben: His mom
"probably thought that the package wasn't for her while I said that it was..."
And provided another address (his dad's address) for me to ship to when the package got back and I re-shipped it.

I suppose you could even look at it this way and say that the package was in fact delivered to the correct address, but refused by Ruben's elected proxy aka his mom and thus resulting in the situation where the package was ultimately lost. Maybe it's just me but I don't see why it becomes the sellers responsibility to take care of anything other than ensuring the product arrives/delivered to the buyer assigned address safely, in the same condition it was sold/purchased, and in a reasonable timeframe.. Does it become, or, is it my responsibility that Ruben could not properly communicate with his mom to receive the package after having it sent to her house? While it is generous of Ruben to accept my offer of sending him the $200 insurance payout instead of nothing.. That comes down to whether or not there actually is a $200 insurance payout - to be determined by how much USPS will refund on the package. Default insurance was $50 if I remember correctly. Insurance wouldn't have mattered because I assumed the package would be delivered without issue and it was. In the case that it was lost in transit to it's assigned destination, which was Rubens PayPal address, before delivery - I would have taken the loss and paid a refund. That wasn't the case though, it was delivered to Rubens PayPal address but refused by his mother. It's been 3 months since the package was delivered to the Mail Recovery Center as dead mail and never located again. I have not yet filed a claim for refund or insurance by USPS because I didn't know I could. I was never told this by any USPS employee or representative I talked to that I could file a claim other than the missing mail Search Claim to try and locate the package at the Mail Recovery Center. I had assumed that the $50 default insurance was all I could get if I decided to go through the hassle.

Chrissy
April 20th, 2018, 02:58 AM
If you are comfortable keeping the buyers money when you know he doesn't have the goods then that's all there is left to say on the subject.
The ebay rule is "you get what you paid for or your money back." I know that doesn't apply here, but it's a good yardstick to go by.

Your agent (carrier) got this wrong. He accepted the parcel back as undelivered, then lost it. That's his loss or even your loss, never the buyer's loss.

If you leave your buyer with no money and no pen, then you should ask yourself how many people will buy from you again after reading what you said and did on this thread?

I've said more than I ever intended to say here and I'm not revisiting this thread.

Pterodactylus
April 20th, 2018, 03:11 AM
If you are comfortable keeping the buyers money when you know he doesn't have the goods then that's all there is left to say on the subject.
The ebay rule is "you get what you paid for or your money back." I know that doesn't apply here, but it's a good yardstick to go by.

Your agent (carrier) got this wrong. He accepted the parcel back as undelivered, then lost it. That's his loss or even your loss, never the buyer's loss.

If you leave your buyer with no money and no pen, then you should ask yourself how many people will buy from you again after reading what you said and did on this thread?

I've said more than I ever intended to say here and I'm not revisiting this thread.

Chrissy your words fit perfect, nothing more to say.

But I fear that he will continue selling pens here and elsewhere.
Maybe less people will buy for now, but this case will be forgotten soon as the customer feedback is not burned into his account as seller (as it would be elsewhere).

Maybe he will also change to a new account with a new name, nothing lost for him, only 5 minutes effort to start over again.

I claimed it often, if it would be my forum I would ban all the sales from it.
They only causes troubles.

And if the community really want sales on the platform I would limit it to old fellows well known in our community.
E.g. as a rule of thumb, no community member is allowed to create a sales thread under 300 non sales related posts (also not lounge, new members or other non content related sub forums posts to count) and a membership shorter than 18 months.

jjm5812
April 20th, 2018, 03:20 AM
I guess it's a difference of opinion then because while the buyer doesn't have the goods or his money, likewise I don't have the product. You seem to have a skewed bias towards buyers on the subject, appreciate the opinions but disagree with the logic.

As for people buying from me, doesn't seem to have effected me as I've sold the OMAS Galileo and Aurora A3 on FPGeeks since this thread posted. Yea, buyers questioned me about Rubens thread attempting to paint and label me as a scammer thus I had to create my own. No issues anymore. Like I've said - if item is not delivered, damaged during shipping, not received as described, or whatever situation may occur before and until delivery - I will not hesitate to refund the purchase as that is my responsibility and contract/duties as a seller to take care of everything up until then. However, as clearly seen in this situation the delivery was made but refused by Rubens mother due to his failure to communicate with her properly. Package was delivered and that is where my duties end. I might have even split losses had Ruben not attempted to paint me as a scammer after all the trouble I went through on his behalf. Besides I've conducted 70+ sales through FP forums many valued $500-$1000+ with only one negative transaction e.g this one - safe to say it's not an issue.

There is always eBay, which if not for my preference to share within the community - to someone who will genuinely appreciate the product I could always use with great success and most likely actually turn a profit.

rubendh
April 20th, 2018, 03:40 AM
I might have even split losses had Ruben not attempted to paint me as a scammer after all the trouble I went through on his behalf.

Come on dude. You litteraly messaged me 'hey I have your pen sitting in my house and will ship it to you when the snow is over' after which you've never messaged me again. I even send you 5 messages in the next following months for an explanation.

Everybody would think you were a scammer, even you were you in my situation.

It's sad that only after putting my initial 'for sale' thread on this board that you contacted me again giving the explanation.

In the end we both made mistakes and I believe we both took part in the poor handling of the situation. That's why I'm asking you to spit the costs. If you're a decent man and a true fountain pen lover that loves the community you'd have no problem with that. It will also clear up potential confusion on your reputation and proofs that you, indeed, are a trustworthy seller.

I wholeheartly hope to solve it this way..

regards

Empty_of_Clouds
April 20th, 2018, 03:59 AM
I guess it's a difference of opinion then because while the buyer doesn't have the goods or his money, likewise I don't have the product. You seem to have a skewed bias towards buyers on the subject, appreciate the opinions but disagree with the logic.

Emphasis is mine. Yes, you don't have the product but you do have his money. Regardless of the logic of this case it is clear that one person has emerged with what they wanted and one person has emerged with nothing. Whichever way you look at this it is hardly a vision of fairness.

Jaws
April 20th, 2018, 06:10 AM
I guess it's a difference of opinion then because while the buyer doesn't have the goods or his money, likewise I don't have the product. You seem to have a skewed bias towards buyers on the subject, appreciate the opinions but disagree with the logic.

As for people buying from me, doesn't seem to have effected me as I've sold the OMAS Galileo and Aurora A3 on FPGeeks since this thread posted. Yea, buyers questioned me about Rubens thread attempting to paint and label me as a scammer thus I had to create my own. No issues anymore. Like I've said - if item is not delivered, damaged during shipping, not received as described, or whatever situation may occur before and until delivery - I will not hesitate to refund the purchase as that is my responsibility and contract/duties as a seller to take care of everything up until then. However, as clearly seen in this situation the delivery was made but refused by Rubens mother due to his failure to communicate with her properly. Package was delivered and that is where my duties end. I might have even split losses had Ruben not attempted to paint me as a scammer after all the trouble I went through on his behalf. Besides I've conducted 70+ sales through FP forums many valued $500-$1000+ with only one negative transaction e.g this one - safe to say it's not an issue.

There is always eBay, which if not for my preference to share within the community - to someone who will genuinely appreciate the product I could always use with great success and most likely actually turn a profit.
I was in the deal with seller for Omas Galileo just before all this became apparent on the post two days back. I sent the payment. I wanted pen early and by DHL as it is reliable for delivering here in saudi Arabia where I'm currently working. This message of ruben, i saw made me uneasy. I wanted to have atleast the tracking number in my hand at earliest.
Initially we had the deal on 520 dollars including shipment through DHL and then i sent the payment i didn't get the shipment number the next day as jason told me that he got the notice of payment but didn't sent it as paypal took time for the confirmation of payment. And he told me that by the time confirmation came DHL office were closed. I was uneasy with ruben post plus i told him before the deal that i will leave for vacation on 27th of this month so i need it early and through DHL. The next day i got his mail and which was

"I am at DHL/UPS store right now - to begin with there is no DHL shipping option to your area from where I live. The only other option is USPS Expedited shipping which comes out to $170.*

I already expected that the package would be expensive from past shipping experience. The crystal display case is large and weighs over 2kg. At the quoted shipping price it is not worth it for me to sell you the pen and absorb the shipping cost. If you want to ship to your parents who are in the state's who can then ship to you, that is fine. The other option is for you to pay for some of the shipping. Otherwise I will refund you. Average market price is $700 and my original purchase price from OMAS is even more. I would have been okay to ship at $40-$60 but close to $200 is not worth it. Especially since you have so many time restrictions. Let me know what you would like to do."

And later on*i got the next mail


I had the person re input the shipping information again to re-check because he input the city wrong. There is a DHL shipping option but it is so $130. So like I said my minimum price to accept for the pen is $500. At $520 payment from you I receive $496 after PayPal fees. So if you want the pen I have quoted you all the shipping options to take a look at. You specifically asked for DHL so I am showing you the price as well as price of other shipping options. You can take a look and decide what you want me to do.*

To this i wrote that i need a refund.

Which he did to my Paypal account instantly.
When seller DHL was expansive than what we expected, he gave me option of either paying more for shipment, ship to my parent in USA ( which obviously i couldn't do as my paypal account had my saudi address)or refund.
I opted for refund. To his( sellers) defence i got my refund back in my paypal account but it will release after 23RD OF APRIL
I don't want to take sides but i just wanted to share my experience. Hope it helped.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180420/67f3c507ae3e02ec361f7536f429f6a7.jpg

Sent from my SM-N920C using Tapatalk

mmd
April 20th, 2018, 07:00 AM
If the pen was only declared $50 on the custom form, then insuramce will very likely just give you $50...... It's just unfortunate and yeah, shabby custom avoiding practices have their own risk.

whichwatch
April 20th, 2018, 07:50 AM
I've lost track of who sold what to whom and my ice is gone.



...Problem solved? I think so...


MY problem is certainly solved. I'm never going to deal with either of these two guys. I'd rather deal with something easier to untangle, like abortion rights or gun control. They don't belong on a "For Sale" Forum any more than this entire discussion does.

InkyAccountant
April 20th, 2018, 09:07 AM
Yes, the seller lied to me and said he has the pen back and sitting in his house. That lie made me close the dispute and i am not able to reopen it.

This should be the end of all discussion. If this is what actually happened, the intent was to deceive. If this statement is true, the seller made a fraudulent statement for a financial gain.

rubendh
April 20th, 2018, 10:04 AM
This should be the end of all discussion. If this is what actually happened, the intent was to deceive. If this statement is true, the seller made a fraudulent statement for a financial gain.

Since we're this far in the discution, it has no sence of calling each other out. Yes, he made mistakes but so did I.
From now on I believe we should focus on a solution, not on blaming each other. Both me, Jason and other readers want this to be finished asap.

I proposed the most decent solution but am yet to receive his responce. (The proposition is to split the costs minus shipping. Concretely each taking a 150usd hit).

Farmboy
April 20th, 2018, 11:12 AM
If the pen was only declared $50 on the custom form, then insuramce will very likely just give you $50...... It's just unfortunate and yeah, shabby custom avoiding practices have their own risk.

Correct.

Now who eats the 450 loss. The shipper who followed the instructions of the buyer or the Buyer who asked the shipper to falsify the customs documents?

Farmboy
April 20th, 2018, 11:15 AM
Jaws-

Good outcome. International shipping from the US can only be described politely as a Bitch. The new postal rates and rules has made international shipping essentially impossible unless you are shipping a few sheets of paper and then they better not have writing on them.

Lets not forget that most of the counter employees don't know the postal rates or codes and that you can't print most forms of postage on the USPS web site and that the kiosks only do first class letters, priority, and express mail.

Todd

mhosea
April 20th, 2018, 11:39 AM
Now who eats the 450 loss. The shipper who followed the instructions of the buyer or the Buyer who asked the shipper to falsify the customs documents?

Interesting angle. One could argue that requesting the false valuation is tantamount to an agreement to reduce the liability of the shipper to the stated valuation.

mmd
April 20th, 2018, 01:38 PM
Whoever requested that is responsible for not having the insurance. You can argue in whatever way you like but that's it. Neither the Buyer nor the seller are professional businessman. As I said, the trading on a forum is based more on the general trust of good will as opposed to laws. I'm pretty sure the seller will not do this to just a random person on Ebay.

mhosea
April 20th, 2018, 01:45 PM
It's more interesting to talk about general principles than this particular case. This particular case is beyond useful discussion. But personally, I'd never considered before that the common request to reduce valuation on a customs form might necessarily imply a proposal by the buyer to reduce shipper liability to the lower valuation. But if you look at it from the insurance angle, it really must be so, provided the payment method doesn't give the buyer a way of weaseling out of the agreement. It's not a useful point to me, because I won't sign a false statement in the first place, and I generally consider my shipments self-insured, but I'd just never thought about it that way.

Dhruv
April 20th, 2018, 01:55 PM
It's more interesting to talk about general principles than this particular case. This particular case is beyond useful discussion. But personally, I'd never before considered before that the common request to reduce valuation on a customs form might necessarily imply a proposal by the buyer to reduce shipper liability to the lower valuation. But if you look at it from the insurance angle, it really must be so, provided the payment method doesn't give the buyer a way of weaseling out of the agreement. It's not a useful point to me, because I won't sign a false statement in the first place, and I generally consider my shipments self-insured, but I'd just never thought about it that way.

Generally, if you ask to under declare the value in the customs form, the shipper tells you that in case the pen is lost in transit, he will only be able to refund whatever is declared on the customs form.
There are some shipping insurance companies that insure an amount other than the amount declared on the customs form, and generally charge more (because of more risk). If I ask to do this sort of thing, I accept full responsibility of my request. Never lost anything but for $1000+ items I use DHL. Have barely used postal service for pens in the past 3-4 years.

I actively avoid using PayPal, both as a seller or a buyer. If you factor in charges at your end and at the seller's end, it comes to approximately 10%. There are many ways to do this for cheaper. Anything more than 5% is unreasonable.

Jaws
April 20th, 2018, 01:57 PM
Jaws-

Good outcome. International shipping from the US can only be described politely as a Bitch. The new postal rates and rules has made international shipping essentially impossible unless you are shipping a few sheets of paper and then they better not have writing on them.

Lets not forget that most of the counter employees don't know the postal rates or codes and that you can't print most forms of postage on the USPS web site and that the kiosks only do first class letters, priority, and express mail.

ToddGood outcome, i think so as well. Though i have got things( pens in specific) shipped from states to saudi arabia but not through DHL. I got DHL ship items 3 or 4 days earlier than the estimated date from europe and just around 60 dollars. I could have opted for this shipment to be sent to my parents who live in states, which i usually do when i purchase through ebay. But this case made me uneasy as ruben got his shipment delivered at parents house and also i was not sure if i could claim paypal refund with getting delivery on the address not registered with PayPal in case it didn't reach to my parents house.

Sent from my SM-N920C using Tapatalk

dneal
April 20th, 2018, 01:59 PM
This thread has more drama than the TNT network.

The questions I would address are: What was the proximate cause of the loss? Was there negligence? Did any negligence relate directly to the proximate cause of the loss. It appears to me that the proximate cause of the loss was the delivery being refused, and that appears directly related to the buyer in not coordinating the delivery with the family member who was to receive the item on his behalf. Thus, the buyer's simple negligence is the proximate cause of the loss, and bears pecuniary liability.

mhosea
April 20th, 2018, 02:03 PM
This thread has more drama than the TNT network.

The questions I would address are: What was the proximate cause of the loss? Was there negligence? Did any negligence relate directly to the proximate cause of the loss. It appears to me that the proximate cause of the loss was the delivery being refused, and that appears directly related to the buyer in not coordinating the delivery with the family member who was to receive the item on his behalf. Thus, the buyer's simple negligence is the proximate cause of the loss, and bears pecuniary liability.

The proximate cause of the loss was the accidental destruction of the label by the carrier (or customs, perhaps). The package made it all the way back to the shipper's hub or even local PO (don't remember) but could not make the final step.

dneal
April 20th, 2018, 02:11 PM
The proximate cause of the loss was the accidental destruction of the label by the carrier.

I must have missed that part, but had the receipt been coordinated ("hey mom, I've got a package coming from the States...") the accidental destruction of the label would be irrelevant.

Wuddus
April 20th, 2018, 02:38 PM
As neither party has seen the package since it was sent, how is it known that the label was destroyed? Surely whoever advised this, knows where the package is.

Jon Szanto
April 20th, 2018, 02:42 PM
Thus, the buyer's simple negligence is the proximate cause of the loss, and bears pecuniary liability.

Bonus points for exquisite use of the language. Good to see you again, D.

mhosea
April 20th, 2018, 03:15 PM
The proximate cause of the loss was the accidental destruction of the label by the carrier.

I must have missed that part, but had the receipt been coordinated ("hey mom, I've got a package coming from the States...") the accidental destruction of the label would be irrelevant.

Yes, that is the gist of the argument for laying the blame for the loss on the buyer. However, although this event involved some negligence, what if it had not? And surely there are degrees of negligence. Do we not calculate liability somehow or other that takes the severity of the negligence into account? If there weren't such an obvious focal point, would we then be searching for some infinitesimal negligence to sort out the blame and then proceed to tilt the liability disproportionately in that direction? I don't think that makes sense. I think you look at the negligence and calculate the liability that flows directly from that negligence. TWO bad things happened here, not one bad thing, and the first only made the second one possible in a context where it was still not likely to occur. More to the point, it did not cause the destruction of the label.

Perhaps yet another analogy would help. And let's work on it together if it's not quite right.

Suppose the secretary at a doctor's office is canceling appointments because the doctor has called in sick, and they accidentally skip one of the patients on their notification list. So this patient's place of work is a fairly long distance away, and she clocks out, drives this long distance from her place of work to the doctor's office, discovers that her appointment has been canceled, reschedules her appointment for next week, and drives back to work, having lost wages, wasted gasoline, and put wear-and-tear on her automobile. The failure to notify is the proximate cause of this loss. We don't normally compensate this kind of loss, but nevertheless, negligence has indeed foisted extra costs upon another human being, and unnecessarily so. She will have to repeat the trip next week. In this case, if we were to suppose that the package had made it all the way back to the shipper, everyone agrees that the buyer is liable for all costs associated with the misadventure, which is at the very least shipping on the return trip if the deal is off, and an additional round of shipping if the deal is still on to get it sent out again. This is not an insubstantial liability compared to the value of the pen, but it is the actual damage that flows directly from buyer's error, at least what we can measure, in the hypothetical case that the package makes it all the way back.

But that didn't happen here. The return trip was not successful. So how do we fix up our analogy. Let's suppose that she gets a flat tire, and the sidewall is damaged so she actually needs a new tire, say $150 or so. So, is the secretary liable for the $150 for the flat tire? My thinking is no, the secretary's mistake is directly responsible for the lost wages, the wasted gasoline, and the unnecessary normal wear-and-tear on the vehicle associated with the trip, but the secretary is not liable for the flat tire. If we could find the responsible party for leaving the debris in the roadway that caused it, we might ask them to pay for it, but this is not practical.

A couple of observations.
1. It is every bit as true that the patient would never have been there to get that flat tire in the first place were it not for the secretary's error.
2. It's also true that every trip the patient makes inherently carries some risk, and the secretary's negligence resulted in doubling the risks for this patient (considering the return trip next week).

What is this analogy missing? Or is my premise wrong that the secretary isn't liable for the cost of the flat?

jjm5812
April 20th, 2018, 03:20 PM
I've lost track of who sold what to whom and my ice is gone.



...Problem solved? I think so...


MY problem is certainly solved. I'm never going to deal with either of these two guys. I'd rather deal with something easier to untangle, like abortion rights or gun control. They don't belong on a "For Sale" Forum any more than this entire discussion does.

But whichwatch, in fact, we have dealt with each other over 4 times. Both in trading: my MB Virginia Wolf + PayPal for your Tibaldi Iride, and in sales ex: $2000+ for your Arco Verde and Extra Lucens, more that I don't remember but I believe each transaction went without problem.

Just saying..

Dhruv
April 20th, 2018, 04:07 PM
A couple of observations.
1. It is every bit as true that the patient would never have been there to get that flat tire in the first place were it not for the secretary's error.
2. It's also true that every trip the patient makes inherently carries some risk, and the secretary's negligence resulted in doubling the risks for this patient (considering the return trip next week).

What is this analogy missing? Or is my premise wrong that the secretary isn't liable for the cost of the flat?

Just my opinion: the analogy might be a bit incorrect. The patient made it to the clinic, but was turned away at the entrance.

whichwatch
April 20th, 2018, 04:44 PM
I've lost track of who sold what to whom and my ice is gone.



...Problem solved? I think so...


MY problem is certainly solved. I'm never going to deal with either of these two guys. I'd rather deal with something easier to untangle, like abortion rights or gun control. They don't belong on a "For Sale" Forum any more than this entire discussion does.

But whichwatch, in fact, we have dealt with each other over 4 times. Both in trading: my MB Virginia Wolf + PayPal for your Tibaldi Iride, and in sales ex: $2000+ for your Arco Verde and Extra Lucens, more that I don't remember but I believe each transaction went without problem.

Just saying..

Jason, I apologize that I didn't remember your screen name from deals we did in what I think was early 2017. I'm really glad they went well for both of us.

Please note that I am not saying that either party in this dispute is dishonorable. But I am saying that it is disconcerting to see two people fighting publicly and risking real damage to their reputations over an amount that nobody wants to lose, but is not exactly the end of the world to either one of you guys based on deals you have both been involved in. Perhaps I should have said that I'm never going to deal with either of these two guys again.

It's always easy when things go right. To me, the sign of a class act is how they deal with the situation when problems occur.

I've lost track of all the arguments and who said what to whom in this matter. I do remember one party suggested each party take a $150 haircut, but apparently the other has not yet accepted. Maybe it's time for you both to put on your big boy pants and recognize that one's reputation is worth more than $150, settle this thing, and move on.

dneal
April 20th, 2018, 05:51 PM
Bonus points for exquisite use of the language. Good to see you again, D.

Thanks Jon. I have to give credit to Army Regulation 735-5 though. These are the criteria and terms we use for deciding whether or not to charge an individual for lost or damaged property.





Yes, that is the gist of the argument for laying the blame for the loss on the buyer. However, although this event involved some negligence, what if it had not? And surely there are degrees of negligence. Do we not calculate liability somehow or other that takes the severity of the negligence into account? If there weren't such an obvious focal point, would we then be searching for some infinitesimal negligence to sort out the blame and then proceed to tilt the liability disproportionately in that direction? I don't think that makes sense. I think you look at the negligence and calculate the liability that flows directly from that negligence. TWO bad things happened here, not one bad thing, and the first only made the second one possible in a context where it was still not likely to occur. More to the point, it did not cause the destruction of the label.

Perhaps yet another analogy would help. And let's work on it together if it's not quite right... (snip)


What is this analogy missing? Or is my premise wrong that the secretary isn't liable for the cost of the flat?

We have (in the Army) a very thorough process for this sort of thing. A lot of property gets lost and/or damaged in the normal course of business (not to mention combat). We determine the proximate cause of the loss, described as: "the person’s acts or omissions were the cause that, in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by a new cause, produced the [loss], and without which the [loss] would not have occurred." We also define types of responsibility (command, supervisory, custodial, personal and direct), types of negligence (simple and gross), and distribute liability by percentage depending on involvement and degrees of negligence.

The point of all that is that I've had a lot (like 30 years) of experience with everything from a soldier losing his helmet to an M1 tank being destroyed by an IED. I instinctively apply it when I read a thread like this.

I see no acts or omissions on the part of the seller that caused the loss - and the pen did arrive at the delivery address specified by the buyer. Upon refusal, the pen became lost. This is directly tied to the actions of the buyer. He specified delivery to that address, and he was aware that a 3rd party would (or should) receive it on his behalf. Getting the 3rd party (or agent of the buyer) to execute the buyer's end of the transaction is certainly not the responsibility of the seller. Failure to ensure this is negligent (however simply), and you seem to agree. Refusal is a positive action on the buyer's part (through his agent), and I think is what begins the natural and continuous sequence without which the loss would not have occurred.

I tried to hash out your analogy, but at the end of the day I think the original premises aren't reconcilable with the pen sale events and the analogy will remain flawed.

You asked "what if it had not (involved negligence)". "What-if's" are a precarious road, because there are so many possibilities. I see no reason for them here other than academic discussion. But I would present the issue in the opposite perspective though: what if the pen was successfully received, but returned for whatever reason, with no proof of delivery back to the seller? Is the seller still on the hook, or is a refund only due when the item is successfully returned? That seems to be more analogous to the situation described in the thread.

mhosea
April 20th, 2018, 09:05 PM
Well this is an academic discussion as far as I am concerned, and I do not mind continuing in that context. Hell, I don't actually give a rat's ass about the real case. I've been talking about general principles from the beginning and marveling at the disagreement over them.


Refusal is a positive action on the buyer's part (through his agent), and I think is what begins the natural and continuous sequence without which the loss would not have occurred.


I see where you're coming from, but I also see now why you have reached a different conclusion. The principles and techniques employed in loss prevention analysis are inappropriate for the determination of civil liability. The point of analyzing such things for loss prevention is not principally to figure out who to blame for it and prosecute them or extract money from them, rather what policies, procedures, training etc. will minimize recurrence. Assignment of blame may occur, but it is secondary to identifying and implementing corrective action. This is very powerful insofar as you can trace a chain of occurrences back to arbitrarily minor causes and implement corrective action there. Diligence in small things pays big dividends. If the buyer tells his mother the package is coming, or if he updates his PayPal address as soon as his address changes, the problem is avoided. But loss prevention is a fundamentally different focus than determination of civil (or criminal) liability. Of course the practice of avoiding the refusal will result in a lower risk of loss. There's no arguing with that! The same thing works perfectly in the analogy. If the secretary employs some very simple procedures when processing the list to ensure that nobody is skipped, e.g. just crossing them off as each is done, they will not miss anybody, hence breaking this and future, potentially similar chains of unfortunate events. From a management perspective, that is the correct lesson. But at the same time it does not answer the question of liability in any sense that might be decided in court.

The analogy isn't intended to be an isomorphic to the real events here, and doesn't need to be to explore the relevant principles. The flat tire was meant to be a small financial matter, as the current issue is a small financial matter. But exploring the principles of identifying civil liability, we can easily ratchet up the severity. While it may not have seemed patently absurd that the secretary would be on the hook for the new tire, if the patient flips the car and dies because she was on the road due to the secretary's negligence, it is patently absurd to talk about the secretary being responsible for her death. This is not a hypothetical you can just brush aside. It's a proof of sorts, reductio ad absurdum. If your principles are correct, they will still apply in the severe case. The principles of loss prevention lead to the right answer for management and the wrong answer for liability in this case. There is no inconsistency in concluding that the secretary must employ a better process and is in some limited sense "responsible" for the chain of events that follows and also to conclude that she has no actual civil liability for accidents on the road that she isn't party to, regardless of how minor or severe they might be. In exactly the same way, it is consistent to conclude that the loss would have been prevented by avoiding the refusal while at the same time concluding that buyer has no actual civil liability for the loss.

This doesn't prove that there is no civil liability in that case. For that we have to look deeper at the contractual relationships between the seller/shipper, the carrier, and the buyer. But, assuming that you agree that the secretary doesn't have civil liability and hence can't be successfully sued for the losses associated with accidents on the road, it does illustrate that applying loss prevention principles can take you to what is obviously the wrong conclusion where civil liability is concerned.

And BTW, how can you be sure the seller wasn't negligent? I never send any package out but that my address is available inside the parcel.

From https://www.uspsoig.gov/blog/lost-and-found:


Processing centers and retail and delivery units send mail items without valid addressee and sender information to the MRC, where MRC staff act as detectives. They scan and open packages in hopes of finding address information that will facilitate the delivery or return of items valued at $25 or more. If items can’t be delivered or returned, the Postal Service donates, recycles, discards, or auctions them off.

If they are to be believed, and if his address is inside the parcel as it should be, he may yet get the pen back. If not, well, there was a clear missed opportunity to avoid the loss, wasn't it.



But I would present the issue in the opposite perspective though: what if the pen was successfully received, but returned for whatever reason, with no proof of delivery back to the seller? Is the seller still on the hook, or is a refund only due when the item is successfully returned? That seems to be more analogous to the situation described in the thread.

Well, when the buyer purchases postage to ship the item back, they become the shipper, so then the carrier is operating as their agent. The roles are then reversed. If the carrier loses the package, the buyer is then on the hook. The problem in this chain of events, from the seller's perspective, is that the refusal preserved the status quo of the carrier acting as the seller's agent. The seller's agent damaged the label, which was the proximate cause of the loss.

Larry Barrieau
April 20th, 2018, 09:08 PM
Both parties each pay half.

dneal
April 20th, 2018, 09:58 PM
Well this is an academic discussion as far as I am concerned, and I do not mind continuing in that context. Hell, I don't actually give a rat's ass about the real case. I've been talking about general principles from the beginning and marveling at the disagreement over them.

I agree. I just don't have the time or energy to run down every rabbit hole. I got home from a business trip late last night and am still a little jet lagged. Maybe I'll have the energy this weekend.


I see where you're coming from, but I also see now why you have reached a different conclusion. The principles and techniques employed in loss prevention analysis are inappropriate for the determination of civil liability. The point of analyzing such things for loss prevention is not principally to figure out who to blame for it and prosecute them or extract money from them, rather what policies, procedures, training etc. will minimize recurrence. Assignment of blame may occur, but it is secondary to identifying and implementing corrective action. This is very powerful insofar as you can trace a chain of occurrences back to arbitrarily minor causes and implement corrective action there. Diligence in small things pays big dividends. If the buyer tells his mother the package is coming, or if he updates his PayPal address as soon as his address changes, the problem is avoided. But loss prevention is a fundamentally different focus than determination of civil (or criminal) liability. Of course the practice of avoiding the refusal will result in a lower risk of loss. There's no arguing with that! The same thing works perfectly in the analogy. If the secretary employs some very simple procedures when processing the list to ensure that nobody is skipped, e.g. just crossing them off as each is done, they will not miss anybody, hence breaking this and future, potentially similar chains of unfortunate events. From a management perspective, that is the correct lesson. But at the same time it does not answer the question of liability in any sense that might be decided in court.

Just to be clear, the policy I'm describing isn't related to loss prevention. It's determining potential responsibility and liability for losses (to include damage) that occur. Oftentimes there is an investigating officer, and it receives legal review. If all three elements (responsibility, proximate cause of the loss and negligence) aren't established, there is no liability. Oftentimes no liability is established.

In this instance, I have no problem establishing the three elements and laying them at the feet of the buyer. I am unable to do so as regards the seller.



The analogy isn't intended to be an isomorphic to the real events here, and doesn't need to be to explore the relevant principles. The flat tire was meant to be a small financial matter, as the current issue is a small financial matter. But exploring the principles of identifying civil liability, we can easily ratchet up the severity. While it may not have seemed patently absurd that the secretary would be on the hook for the new tire, if the patient flips the car and dies because she was on the road due to the secretary's negligence, it is patently absurd to talk about the secretary being responsible for her death. This is not a hypothetical you can just brush aside. It's a proof of sorts, reductio ad absurdum. If your principles are correct, they will still apply in the severe case. The principles of loss prevention lead to the right answer for management and the wrong answer for liability in this case. There is no inconsistency in concluding that the secretary must employ a better process and is in some limited sense "responsible" for the chain of events that follows and also to conclude that she has no actual civil liability for accidents on the road that she isn't party to, regardless of how minor or severe they might be. In exactly the same way, it is consistent to conclude that the loss would have been prevented by avoiding the refusal while at the same time concluding that buyer has no actual civil liability for the loss.

This doesn't prove that there is no civil liability in that case. For that we have to look deeper at the contractual relationships between the seller/shipper, the carrier, and the buyer. But, assuming that you agree that the secretary doesn't have civil liability and hence can't be successfully sued for the losses associated with accidents on the road, it does illustrate that applying loss prevention principles can take you to what is obviously the wrong conclusion where civil liability is concerned.

I didn't think the analogy was sophomoric. I just thought it diverged too far from the actual events to be representative. Analogies illustrate, but they don't constitute proof.

The shipper's potential responsibility is an interesting area though, but they also are "victims" of the buyer's negligence. They got the pen to the address like the buyer wanted, and held up their true contract. Had the buyer not been negligent, we wouldn't be talking about the shipper. It's a consequence of the buyer's action.


And BTW, how can you be sure the seller wasn't negligent? I never send any package out but that my address is available inside the parcel.

From https://www.uspsoig.gov/blog/lost-and-found:


Processing centers and retail and delivery units send mail items without valid addressee and sender information to the MRC, where MRC staff act as detectives. They scan and open packages in hopes of finding address information that will facilitate the delivery or return of items valued at $25 or more. If items can’t be delivered or returned, the Postal Service donates, recycles, discards, or auctions them off.

If they are to be believed, and if his address is inside the parcel as it should be, he may yet get the pen back. If not, well, there was a clear missed opportunity to avoid the loss, wasn't it.

I can't be sure of a lot of things in this scenario, and can only analyze what's presented and work from an assumption that it's reasonably accurate. Again, if the seller contracted for the package to be delivered to the buyer's address - and that happened - I can't see any negligence. Including additional labels to ensure proper return have no bearing on getting the item delivered. If the buyer executed his end in good faith and without negligence then all of these other points regarding the shipper, while perhaps prudent, are irrelevant.




But I would present the issue in the opposite perspective though: what if the pen was successfully received, but returned for whatever reason, with no proof of delivery back to the seller? Is the seller still on the hook, or is a refund only due when the item is successfully returned? That seems to be more analogous to the situation described in the thread.

Well, when the buyer purchases postage to ship the item back, they become the shipper, so then the carrier is operating as their agent. The roles are then reversed. If the carrier loses the package, the buyer is then on the hook. The problem in this chain of events, from the seller's perspective, is that the refusal preserved the status quo of the carrier acting as the seller's agent. The seller's agent damaged the label, which was the proximate cause of the loss.

I don't disagree with the first part, and perhaps one could make the argument that the buyer in essence becomes the shipper because of the active refusal of the delivery. I can only point out that the seller's agent would not be in this position without the negligence of the buyer. The buyer still remains culpable for this whole problem.

I can't state any more clearly why I hold the viewpoint of this event (given the information presented), and will only end up reiterating moreso. I can establish in my mind all the elements that constitute the buyer being on the hook for the problem. You and others are free to agree or not with my analysis, and I can be persuaded otherwise given enough evidence or rational argument. Similarly, I see the point you're making but disagree with it. As regards the analogies, I think they're unnecessary, since the facts are relatively simple and easy to manage.

Some asides, for what it's worth; although I think none of these issues bear on the loss, negligence or liability:

I wouldn't have executed the transaction with the buyer, given the seller's description of the early events.
Relating that the pen had been received in return shipment by the seller for the purpose of avoiding a claim (if that was the reason) is disingenuous.
The buyer filing a claim in the first place is disingenuous.
If the pen is recovered by the seller, the buyer is due a refund.
If USPS pays out some amount, all of that is due to the buyer.

mhosea
April 20th, 2018, 11:17 PM
The analogy isn't intended to be an isomorphic to the real events here, and doesn't need to be to explore the relevant principles.

I didn't think the analogy was sophomoric. I just thought it diverged too far from the actual events to be representative. Analogies illustrate, but they don't constitute proof.


"isomorphic". Analogies do not prove, but counterexamples disprove false conjectures. An analogy can be a counterexample. At any rate, forget the analogy as it relates to the current issue. I just have one question about it in isolation. Based on your understanding of the principles of identifying negligence and liability, why is the secretary not on the hook for the tire?


perhaps one could make the argument that the buyer in essence becomes the shipper because of the active refusal of the delivery.


Return of refused mail is a documented part of the service that the seller purchased.


I can only point out that the seller's agent would not be in this position without the negligence of the buyer. The buyer still remains culpable for this whole problem.


To establish liability under that theory, what you're necessarily claiming is that the loss of the package by the carrier was a reasonably foreseeable outcome. I think that's where you might have to work hard in court. Neither party foresaw that eventuality, the seller spectacularly so. I guess everyone is aware of the remote risk of parcel loss, but I'm not sure that you would be able to successfully argue that it was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the buyer's choice not to discuss the parcel's arrival with his mother.

dneal
April 21st, 2018, 06:58 AM
"isomorphic". Analogies do not prove, but counterexamples disprove false conjectures. An analogy can be a counterexample. At any rate, forget the analogy as it relates to the current issue. I just have one question about it in isolation. Based on your understanding of the principles of identifying negligence and liability, why is the secretary not on the hook for the tire?

Doh! Like I said, I was jet lagged and apparently read it too quickly. There isn't enough information to make a decision about the tire.

[/QUOTE]


Return of refused mail is a documented part of the service that the seller purchased.

I believe it's an optional service. The true service being contracted is delivery of the package, which happened. If there were multiple attempts, and no one was home, and it was lost while being returned... that would be a different set of circumstances. It seems you keep offering possible outcomes (what-if's) rather than focusing on what did. Like I said, there are plenty of rabbit holes we could run down.


To establish liability under that theory, what you're necessarily claiming is that the loss of the package by the carrier was a reasonably foreseeable outcome. I think that's where you might have to work hard in court. Neither party foresaw that eventuality, the seller spectacularly so. I guess everyone is aware of the remote risk of parcel loss, but I'm not sure that you would be able to successfully argue that it was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the buyer's choice not to discuss the parcel's arrival with his mother.

You go on to answer the first sentence yourself when you recognize that "everyone is aware...". I agree that the active refusal of the package was not a reasonably foreseeable consequence, but that's more credit to the seller's case, not the buyer's.

rubendh
April 21st, 2018, 07:33 AM
During this whole discution many say the buyer is partially in fault and many others that the seller is in fault.

The most decent way to solve this problem is to divide the loss by two, for the above reasons. I have yet to receive any response from the Jason, however we all want to conclude this already. If you don't agree, Jason, which other pro-active solution do you propose? Hope to hear any response from you soon

jjm5812
April 21st, 2018, 08:42 AM
As I stated multiple times Ruben, I will return to you whatever amount USPS is due to refund or return to me through filing the claim. That is the offer I have agreed to return to you based on what I considered to be payment for the failure to receive the package. Considering 1) the package was delivered and at one point physically in the hands of your mother 2) she refused signature(your responsibility) and thus the package which lead to it being returned to sender aka me 3) once the package is in the hands of the buyer or in this case the addressee it is no longer my responsibility 4) my offer to refund you the amount that USPS will pay is what I have agreed to do to compensate you for the loss.

rubendh
April 21st, 2018, 08:56 AM
As I stated multiple times Ruben, I will return to you whatever amount USPS is due to refund or return to me through filing the claim.

This is a good option if you have insured the pen for the value it was sold for. (As is the normal process and I hope you followed).

Please keep me up to date how it goes.

Thanks

Pterodactylus
April 21st, 2018, 09:16 AM
Oh great deal, the seller keep the whole money from the buyer and graciously give back whatever he gets from the carrier if he get something.

Means 0 in words Null loss on seller side.

The seller show not the lightest amount of insight that the loss of the pen by HIS carrier was in his risk portfolio.

An real offer would be:
Return the buyer 275$ Immediately (he keeps 75 as I remember Ruben paid 350$)

The seller can claim up to 200$ from the carrier plus the 75 from the buyer left and additionally he still has the chance to get the pen back (means either up to 275 or 75+pen).

But to be honest my believing in the integrity of the seller is next to zero.
Without this discussion he would have kept the money and claimed the insurance from the carrier or got the pen back.

Mastiff
April 21st, 2018, 09:54 AM
Thank you both for the most amusing and interesting read. I apologise for saying this as this must be a very painful experience for you both.

Mr. Ruben, I guess we all learn the hard way at times. I guess the critical mistake was closing the paypal claim. We all learnt from this event not to ever, ever, ever close the claim until the money is refunded. It would have been very simple. Also, you were a bit sloppy and haphazard in your actions (like ****ing up the address and not communicating with your mother etc). Might have to be a bit more careful when some money is involved.

Mr. jjm, my sympathy for what you went through. You did send the pen and spent a lot of time on trying to sort this out. But to a lot of us, all that is simply, utterly and absolutely nullified (from a moral point of view) by the fact that you deviously lied to Mr Ruben to close the paypal claim. I guess that is the lesson for you. Be honest. Things that go around do and will come around. If you do gain anything from this (by not losing anything) you will most certainly lose somewhere else. That is just life.

Good luck to you both. As much as I want to be contianually entertained by this I do hope you both will achieve some sort of a mutually agreeable conclusion.

mhosea
April 21st, 2018, 10:29 AM
You go on to answer the first sentence yourself when you recognize that "everyone is aware...".

I disagree. Probabilities do matter in negligence cases. The test is not whether everyone is aware, rather whether a reasonably prudent person's actions would have been informed by consideration of the possibility. I seriously doubt that most reasonably prudent people would be reluctant to refuse a parcel because they fear it will be lost by the carrier. At any rate, this is, at least, a bona fide point of disagreement that we would have to let the judge or jury decide.

You haven't established proximate causality. Every time the question comes up, you fall back on an argument that the buyer was the cause in fact. That's a necessary but not sufficient condition. The analogy was an example of cause in fact not being sufficient to establish proximate causality. I have claimed that the carrier's error was the proximate cause. The carrier's error was intervening and converted the nature and severity of the loss that would have flowed naturally from the buyer's mistakes. Note that the buyer's error did not place the carrier in a difficult or unusual situation, rather a routine one from their perspective. Merely having put the carrier in position where it was possible for them to err is not ipso facto sufficient to be held responsible for the carrier's mistakes.

Mastiff
April 21st, 2018, 10:38 AM
You go on to answer the first sentence yourself when you recognize that "everyone is aware...".

I disagree. Probabilities do matter in negligence cases. The test is not whether everyone is aware, rather whether a reasonably prudent person's actions would have been informed by consideration of the possibility. I seriously doubt that most reasonably prudent people would be reluctant to refuse a parcel because they fear it will be lost by the carrier. At any rate, this is, at least, a bona fide point of disagreement that we would have to let the judge or jury decide.

You haven't established proximate causality. Every time the question comes up, you fall back on an argument that the buyer was the cause in fact. That's a necessary but not sufficient condition. The analogy was an example of cause in fact not being sufficient to establish proximate causality. I have claimed that the carrier's error was the proximate cause. The carrier's error was intervening and converted the nature and severity of the loss that would have flowed naturally from the buyer's mistakes. Note that the buyer's error did not place the carrier in a difficult or unusual situation, rather a routine one from their perspective. Merely having put the carrier in position where it was possible for them to err is not ipso facto sufficient to be held responsible for the carrier's mistakes.

We are all watching this conversation between you and dneal with great interest. dneal said he was in the military, so perhaps he is a retired military prosecutor or something. Might we ask who you are? You sound like a law professor emeritus or a QC. Of course, if you don't mind letting us know.

dneal
April 21st, 2018, 11:02 AM
I disagree. Probabilities do matter in negligence cases. The test is not whether everyone is aware, rather whether a reasonably prudent person's actions would have been informed by consideration of the possibility. I seriously doubt that most reasonably prudent people would be reluctant to refuse a parcel because they fear it will be lost by the carrier. At any rate, this is, at least, a bona fide point of disagreement that we would have to let the judge or jury decide.

You're moving the goalposts to probabilities. "Everyone is aware" is a shorthand way of saying reasonably prudent people recognize that there is a risk of loss in shipping. There will be no judge or jury, other than in the court of public opinion.


You haven't established proximate causality. Every time the question comes up, you fall back on an argument that the buyer was the cause in fact. That's a necessary but not sufficient condition. The analogy was an example of cause in fact not being sufficient to establish proximate causality. I have claimed that the carrier's error was the proximate cause. The carrier's error was intervening and converted the nature and severity of the loss that would have flowed naturally from the buyer's mistakes. Note that the buyer's error did not place the carrier in a difficult or unusual situation, rather a routine one from their perspective. Merely having put the carrier in position where it was possible for them to err is not ipso facto sufficient to be held responsible for the carrier's mistakes.

I believe I have established proximate causality, and I know I have as regards my own opinion. I'm not falling back to any argument, I'm reiterating my consistent argument. I already said this was going to happen. I'm happy to clarify if you don't understand why I've arrived at this conclusion. If you do understand and simply disagree, that's fine. You're not going to change my mind simply stating that or that you think I'm wrong. I still think your analogy is poor, flawed and irrelevant. Can you argue your case without introducing receptionists and flat tires?

I disagree that the buyer didn't put the carrier in a position to err. Had they not refused delivery, we wouldn't be talking about any of this.

We've apparently reached an impasse.

--edit--

I'll try to provide a little clarity in the role and responsibility of the shipper, since that is a point others have raised as well.

The shipper has a responsibility to deliver the item, and this is the crux of the contract between them and the seller. This was satisfied.
The shipper found themselves with a duty to return the item to the seller, due to the negligent action of the buyer.
The shipper has not satisfied that duty. If they do, and the item is returned; clearly the seller should refund the money.
The shipper perhaps has a financial obligation to the seller, but this hinges on the terms of the delivery contract; and I don't know those details. If there is compensation to the seller, then certainly that should be sent to the buyer.

None of that is relevant to the current obligations between the seller and buyer. I am looking at the issue with the assumption that the pen is lost for good, and one (or both) parties will bear financial loss. For the reasons I've laid out earlier, I think the buyer bears 100% of the burden and the seller bears 0%. Should the seller choose to compensate the buyer in some fashion, I see that as simply a matter of good form / good faith. Speaking of good faith, that notion seems absent in your evaluation.

Lastly, by posting in a very "matter of fact" way; I realize there is a significant potential for it to be interpreted in a negative way. By being terse or matter of fact, I'm not trying to be rude; so my apologies if that is the perception by anyone.

dneal
April 21st, 2018, 11:10 AM
We are all watching this conversation between you and dneal with great interest. dneal said he was in the military, so perhaps he is a retired military prosecutor or something. Might we ask who you are? You sound like a law professor emeritus or a QC. Of course, if you don't mind letting us know.

I'm still in the military, but not a prosecutor. Military officers get a lot of practical experience with law, from administering punishment to contracting legalities. I have dealt with hundreds of cases regarding property accountability. I was applying those principles to the issue at hand, in an effort to offer a different perspective. I don't know if mhosea is a lawyer or not. It has little bearing on the validity of the argument though. Either one makes a sound argument, or they don't. There can of course be competing viewpoints that are equally compelling, but it's up to the reader (in this case) to draw their own conclusions.

akafridi3
April 21st, 2018, 11:56 AM
Can we Mark this thread as sold so it can be closed. Please move the conversation to another section on this forum and continue there.

jjm5812
April 21st, 2018, 12:32 PM
Thank you both for the most amusing and interesting read. I apologise for saying this as this must be a very painful experience for you both.

Mr. Ruben, I guess we all learn the hard way at times. I guess the critical mistake was closing the paypal claim. We all learnt from this event not to ever, ever, ever close the claim until the money is refunded. It would have been very simple. Also, you were a bit sloppy and haphazard in your actions (like ****ing up the address and not communicating with your mother etc). Might have to be a bit more careful when some money is involved.

Mr. jjm, my sympathy for what you went through. You did send the pen and spent a lot of time on trying to sort this out. But to a lot of us, all that is simply, utterly and absolutely nullified (from a moral point of view) by the fact that you deviously lied to Mr Ruben to close the paypal claim. I guess that is the lesson for you. Be honest. Things that go around do and will come around. If you do gain anything from this (by not losing anything) you will most certainly lose somewhere else. That is just life.

Good luck to you both. As much as I want to be contianually entertained by this I do hope you both will achieve some sort of a mutually agreeable conclusion.

To clarify: The PayPal claim was not actively closed by Ruben. The PayPal claim was closed by PayPal. I don't recall exactly how long after I made that statement to Ruben in a PM, through the forum, but PayPal closed the case; Ruben was not the one who closed it. Again, the case was closed by PayPal not Ruben. If the tables were turned, I would be the one taking the entirety of the loss. That is: the loss I took selling the pen, discounted, to Ruben based on his limited budget, the shipping fees, and the pen itself. In that situation there would be no other choice than accept it and move on.

To be honest I found this entire thread both interesting to read and amusing at times as well. I personally don't take any offense or hold any grudges to differing opinions or any opinions/statements made in this thread. I guess when it comes to online communications or really anything that occurs online between strangers, I feel no personal attachment. That's not to say I don't cherish or create/have any personal relationships through meeting people online, I certainly do. However, other than feeling the need to provide backstory to Rubens original post - I had no other purpose or reason to bother responding. Thanks to everyone who took the time to read and comment, I hope you either found some enjoyment or interest in reading through it. If you didn't - I apologize and I suppose you could always have made the choice not to click on it. Thanks again.

jjm5812
April 21st, 2018, 12:46 PM
BTW can someone explain to me how to mark the thread as SOLD? I will mark it SOLD/close it later tonight. Thanks

kyleparsons4842
April 21st, 2018, 12:51 PM
In the lighter blue banner at the top of the thread posts, there is a drop down menu titled "Thread Tools". Click that and "Mark this thread as Sold".

mhosea
April 21st, 2018, 02:37 PM
Lastly, by posting in a very "matter of fact" way; I realize there is a significant potential for it to be interpreted in a negative way. By being terse or matter of fact, I'm not trying to be rude; so my apologies if that is the perception by anyone.

Not by me. You're one of my favorite people here.



I don't know if mhosea is a lawyer or not. It has little bearing on the validity of the argument though. Either one makes a sound argument, or they don't. There can of course be competing viewpoints that are equally compelling, but it's up to the reader (in this case) to draw their own conclusions.

And that is why. FWIW, IANAL. Last time I checked, lawyers could hardly agree on anything, anyway. :)

mmd
April 21st, 2018, 03:28 PM
How about you two represent each side and go to a small claim court? The result is clear to me but it will be asmusing.

Pterodactylus
April 21st, 2018, 03:47 PM
How about you two represent each side and go to a small claim court? The result is clear to me but it will be asmusing.

How should this happen?
Ruben is located in Europe, the seller in the US.

If the seller would be in the same country (or at least within the EU), and if Ruben has a insurance to cover the law suit costs than I already would have suggested to persue a law suit.

Iˋm no lawyer but I would bet that Ruben would get his money back (at least in Europe, and the seller had to cover the law suit costs at the end)

mmd
April 21st, 2018, 04:14 PM
I don't know. But as long as there are two lawyers in the same country, I imagine it could happen. Just have to have one side sign some paperwork to fully authorize the lawyer to represent him.

I mean these two lawyer like persons already argued a lot here. A court will be a better place and will get the thing solved.

Wade
April 21st, 2018, 04:17 PM
Oh FFS please let this end.