Canuck Audio Mart Hifi and Audio ForumCanuck Audio Mart Hifi and Audio Forum
It is currently Thu Oct 19, 2017 6:37 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 3:20 pm
Posts: 42
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC, CA
Was the buyer trying to save on Quebec's 5% GST/HST from the transaction, that is just $60? I'm just scratching my head as to what was his motivation for not paying full insurance.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 2:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:18 am
Posts: 30
Location: Etobicoke, ON, CA
ej251awd wrote:
Was the buyer trying to save on Quebec's 5% GST/HST from the transaction, that is just $60? I'm just scratching my head as to what was his motivation for not paying full insurance.


we are in private deal, so no tax here.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 3:20 pm
Posts: 42
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC, CA
BIGJAM wrote:
we are in private deal, so no tax here.


I see.

My customer has a similar thing about the insurance. He bought a high end tuner from the the other side of the world. To dodge taxes and duties, he asked the seller for a $100 insurance only which was less than 7% the purchase cost. The tuner being heavier than most amplifiers got severely damaged in transit since the seller didn't do his part of packing it very well.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:49 am
Posts: 82
BIGJAM wrote:

Share the loss because we didn't clear which is the point time the deal is completed and Who is in the responsibility of missing/damage/delay,etc. In my case I'm willing to take the half.

Honestly, you're being too nice. The responsibility/risk is 100% theirs when they choose not to have it insured. I consider myself an honest and decent person, but unless there is more to this story than you have mentioned, there is no way would I consider a partial refund for a buyer who chose not to pay for insurance.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:58 pm 
Offline
Premium User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 11:44 pm
Posts: 6084
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
brendelac wrote:
BIGJAM wrote:

Share the loss because we didn't clear which is the point time the deal is completed and Who is in the responsibility of missing/damage/delay,etc. In my case I'm willing to take the half.

Honestly, you're being too nice. The responsibility/risk is 100% theirs when they choose not to have it insured. I consider myself an honest and decent person, but unless there is more to this story than you have mentioned, there is no way would I consider a partial refund for a buyer who chose not to pay for insurance.


I agree with this...

_________________
I Put A Spell On You!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:11 pm
Posts: 861
Location: Abbotsford, BC, CA
brendelac wrote:
Honestly, you're being too nice. The responsibility/risk is 100% theirs when they choose not to have it insured. I consider myself an honest and decent person, but unless there is more to this story than you have mentioned, there is no way would I consider a partial refund for a buyer who chose not to pay for insurance.


You have a point, but there is something that sways me otherwise. We are a community of people that share a passion for audio. I've visited some and welcomed some others into my home as we tested gear and completed transactions. I've met others as we each drove part way to trade some treasure or other. There are many here who I've trusted to send money with nothing but their word to send an item upon receipt. I've not once been ripped off. I know some have, but it's not very common here.

There is something that connects us even if just a little bit. Maybe it's kind of a brotherhood, this passion for audio. I did once send half the cost of a repair to a buyer when he found an issue upon delivery. It was clear across the country, and perhaps the amp was damaged in transit. We discussed the matter with a few emails, and I took him at his word. I didn't have to do it, but if I had received a damaged amp, I would have felt the same way as he.

_________________
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.

Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 1:02 am 
Offline
Premium User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 11:44 pm
Posts: 6084
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
runnin wrote:
brendelac wrote:
Honestly, you're being too nice. The responsibility/risk is 100% theirs when they choose not to have it insured. I consider myself an honest and decent person, but unless there is more to this story than you have mentioned, there is no way would I consider a partial refund for a buyer who chose not to pay for insurance.


You have a point, but there is something that sways me otherwise. We are a community of people that share a passion for audio. I've visited some and welcomed some others into my home as we tested gear and completed transactions. I've met others as we each drove part way to trade some treasure or other. There are many here who I've trusted to send money with nothing but their word to send an item upon receipt. I've not once been ripped off. I know some have, but it's not very common here.

There is something that connects us even if just a little bit. Maybe it's kind of a brotherhood, this passion for audio. I did once send half the cost of a repair to a buyer when he found an issue upon delivery. It was clear across the country, and perhaps the amp was damaged in transit. We discussed the matter with a few emails, and I took him at his word. I didn't have to do it, but if I had received a damaged amp, I would have felt the same way as he.


It's a nice sentiment but ultimately you are rewarding him for a 'bad decision' on his part.

_________________
I Put A Spell On You!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 5:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:18 am
Posts: 30
Location: Etobicoke, ON, CA
To all,
I always stand with my ethics, moral and personality. And I know my rights, logic and reasoning behind of my decision, I think I can take all the words from you as opinions, appreciate it really.
I lean to Runnin thoughts.
Thanks again.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 9:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:28 am
Posts: 4
Location: Pointe-Claire, QC, CA
I guess I'll wade in here since I am the buyer in this unfortunate situation. Thanks to everyone for their interest and well-intentioned input, this is the only comment I'll make until the issue is resolved. Sorry it's somewhat detailed and long-winded;

First let me say that I have no animosity towards this seller, I do not question his integrity and am still hopeful we can come to a fair and reasonable conclusion.

I am a passionate audio hobbyist, I enjoy trading on CAM and consider it an essential resource for this hobby. A short while ago I made what I thought was a reasonable cash offer, as is common practice, for two mono block amplifiers and stated that my offer should include shipping to my location since it's too far for me to pick up. I did not specifically ask that I didn't want nor wouldn't pay for shipping insurance. My assumption generally is that if a package is sent without insurance then there is a risk that is shared by the buyer AND the seller. I recognize that accepting the terms of this deal was a mistake on my part. Lesson learned. Still, I hope we can come to a mutually acceptable arrangement. The seller's response was that he would accept my offer on the condition that he would not pay any Canada Post shipping insurance in order to save on shipping costs. I agreed to this deal, **mistake, I know**. I do not dispute this point, but the risk seemed low, so I paid the full agreed upon amount upfront in cash (EMT). And wouldn't you know it Canada Post lost one of the boxes :(

Once it was clear the second parcel was lost (tracking showed not moved from destination after 5 days) I opened a ticket with Canada Post. But after a few days they closed my ticket with; "Our investigation into your request indicates that no scan has been uploaded to the Canada Post tracking system to indicate delivery of your item." Followed by "Any further action must be initiated by the sender of the item". I have been in contact with the seller throughout this ordeal.

I'd like to add my perspective on the topic of shipping and insurance;

Shipping insurance doesn't offer a buyer any claim protection from the shipping carrier even if there are lost or damaged deliverables. Insured or not, the only recourse a buyer has is with the seller. Even if my package had been insured, Canada Post will not accept any claim from me, not even the default $100 included with every delivery. Only the shipper can make a claim. I don't know if there are any specific policies at CAM regarding shipping insurance but it is generally understood that it is the seller's responsibility to deliver a package safely, which usually requires buying insurance and tracking. With all that said I think it is reasonable to conclude that shipping insurance protects the SELLER and it is the seller's responsibility to refund the buyer. This is 100% consistent with both eBay and Paypal's shipping policies.

Jim


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:18 am
Posts: 30
Location: Etobicoke, ON, CA
Yes, that's the key point: our deal is a FOB, or CIF? Not so cleared. Even within these trading terms it still need negotiate the goods risk (missing,losing, damaging...) on the way shipping from seller's to buyer's it's like a deal in international trading!?
I was cut off $100 from my asking price. Offered $50 for shipping two boxes, with no insurance was consented by buyer, Jim.

Seems we all admitted the terms and conditions, and the situation caused by Canada Post. I think we can make a fair solution to this issue.

When the come to the end, whatever it is, as far as buyer, Mr. Jim is OK to go, I can let CAMers know the end of this story.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 8:20 am
Posts: 4268
Location: London, ON, CA
jpalkhivala wrote:
I think it is reasonable to conclude that shipping insurance protects the SELLER and it is the seller's responsibility to refund the buyer. This is 100% consistent with both eBay and Paypal's shipping policies.

Jim


I respectfully disagree, Jim. You chose to haggle on the shipping, and you chose to refuse the insurance. It is not "the seller's responsibility to refund the buyer."
If he manages to recover $100 from Canada Post, THAT is what you should receive. Sorry, but you have made a great case for local sales ... and firm pricing.
Hopefully Canada Post will find it and deliver it intact. Good luck.

_________________
1978 Rickenbacker 4001, 2010 Gibson Thunderbird, and Dean Fretless Basses;
1987 Guild Nightbird, 2000 Taylor 310KCE, and Godin 5th Avenue Guitars.

If you can use one of those newfangled Internets, you can post photos in your damn classified ads. :roll:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 9:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:49 am
Posts: 82
* Deleted post. I've said how I feel already.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2017 10:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 4:39 pm
Posts: 66
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Quadzilla wrote:
jpalkhivala wrote:
I think it is reasonable to conclude that shipping insurance protects the SELLER and it is the seller's responsibility to refund the buyer. This is 100% consistent with both eBay and Paypal's shipping policies.

Jim


I respectfully disagree, Jim. You chose to haggle on the shipping, and you chose to refuse the insurance. It is not "the seller's responsibility to refund the buyer."
If he manages to recover $100 from Canada Post, THAT is what you should receive. Sorry, but you have made a great case for local sales ... and firm pricing.
Hopefully Canada Post will find it and deliver it intact. Good luck.


Maybe you can argue that in a moral or ethical way but legally I don't think that's how it works.

I see many ads where the seller tries to transfer responsibility to the buyer should they refuse insurance. What the seller should be doing is offering a service with insurance whether the buyer asks for it or not because it is up to them to ensure delivery of the item so they are protected.

As a seller I only offer one type of shipping for expensive items and that's tracked with insurance. If a buyer doesn't like the cost, they can pass on the item.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 8:20 am
Posts: 4268
Location: London, ON, CA
eddiel wrote:
Quadzilla wrote:
jpalkhivala wrote:
I think it is reasonable to conclude that shipping insurance protects the SELLER and it is the seller's responsibility to refund the buyer. This is 100% consistent with both eBay and Paypal's shipping policies.

Jim


I respectfully disagree, Jim. You chose to haggle on the shipping, and you chose to refuse the insurance. It is not "the seller's responsibility to refund the buyer."
If he manages to recover $100 from Canada Post, THAT is what you should receive. Sorry, but you have made a great case for local sales ... and firm pricing.
Hopefully Canada Post will find it and deliver it intact. Good luck.


Maybe you can argue that in a moral or ethical way but legally I don't think that's how it works.

I see many ads where the seller tries to transfer responsibility to the buyer should they refuse insurance. What the seller should be doing is offering a service with insurance whether the buyer asks for it or not because it is up to them to ensure delivery of the item so they are protected.

As a seller I only offer one type of shipping for expensive items and that's tracked with insurance. If a buyer doesn't like the cost, they can pass on the item.


The buyer beat the seller down on the price of the unit AND on the shipping cost (he only paid $50 to ship two boxes. The seller already subsidized the shipping cost, and you expect the buyer to spring for insurance at $2.25 per hundred, plus the cost of a delivery signature (now required when you purchase additional insurance)?

That is why my comment said that this was a great case for firm pricing. Personally, I would have turned down the deal. The buyer chose to nickel and dime the seller, and now he is paying the price for his bargaining tactics. Would you haggle with me on shipping costs? Just askin'.

_________________
1978 Rickenbacker 4001, 2010 Gibson Thunderbird, and Dean Fretless Basses;
1987 Guild Nightbird, 2000 Taylor 310KCE, and Godin 5th Avenue Guitars.

If you can use one of those newfangled Internets, you can post photos in your damn classified ads. :roll:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:18 am
Posts: 30
Location: Etobicoke, ON, CA
eddiel wrote:
Quadzilla wrote:
jpalkhivala wrote:
I think it is reasonable to conclude that shipping insurance protects the SELLER and it is the seller's responsibility to refund the buyer. This is 100% consistent with both eBay and Paypal's shipping policies.

Jim


I respectfully disagree, Jim. You chose to haggle on the shipping, and you chose to refuse the insurance. It is not "the seller's responsibility to refund the buyer."
If he manages to recover $100 from Canada Post, THAT is what you should receive. Sorry, but you have made a great case for local sales ... and firm pricing.
Hopefully Canada Post will find it and deliver it intact. Good luck.


Maybe you can argue that in a moral or ethical way but legally I don't think that's how it works.

I see many ads where the seller tries to transfer responsibility to the buyer should they refuse insurance. What the seller should be doing is offering a service with insurance whether the buyer asks for it or not because it is up to them to ensure delivery of the item so they are protected.

As a seller I only offer one type of shipping for expensive items and that's tracked with insurance. If a buyer doesn't like the cost, they can pass on the item.


Buyer cut off $100 for the item(s), and offered $50 for requesting a shipping them, when seller told buyer it was only enough for regular shipping without insurance, buyer answered that he was OK for shipping them without insurance. I have the email in my hotmail.com account, the inbox. Thanks to the Hotmail online system!
Now one of the two boxes lost in the Canada Post system.
I am now interested in going to the court, let's see what will happen. Because buyer returned the successfully delivered one of the two boxes to me. I could refuse the returning.

On the other hand, I chose the Canada Post publicly offered delivery service and paid the charge, so wasn't there the shipping contract signed up? Isn't the Canada Post failed to complete the contract?! Isn't it 100% the Canada Post's fault/responsibility? Why customer have to bear all the loss?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Genetic and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group