Do I have to fill it out ?

soolin

cattie wrote: »

I must be the only one here who would have filled it in! The thought of somebody missing out on compensation from RM because of me would be too much of a guilt trip, even if he had been a bit of a pain in the neck. There is enough nastiness in the world without me adding to it is my train of thought.

But seller has refused to refund buyer and gone to dispute, which implies they believe buyer is lying and has the item.

So you would help seller get their refund even though they were denying you yours.

Crowqueen

cattie wrote: »

I must be the only one here who would have filled it in! The thought of somebody missing out on compensation from RM because of me would be too much of a guilt trip, even if he had been a bit of a pain in the neck. There is enough nastiness in the world without me adding to it is my train of thought.

The seller is being an idiot, so in this case I would be tempted to just leave it to one side.

An item turned up for me three weeks late just the day after I had got a refund out of the seller who promised me one thing and then (surprise surprise) failed to deliver. I couldn't even look at it until I had repaid, but some sellers do make it hard on themselves for their buyers to feel anything approaching sympathy for them. I quietly got her Paypal account email and sent her the money and got on with things, I didn't feel like even telling her what the money was for - just did the right thing and left it at that. If she'd been understanding or honoured the promise she'd made to me I'd have been a bit more open about it and offered to revise the neutral I left her (or I wouldn't have left a neutral in the first place). As it happens she went bust because of that month's trading, but at the end of the day - once the buyer has paid, the seller is the one who owes the buyer, not the other way round. If sellers want buyers to be nice them, they need to be the ones to cultivate their customers, not abuse them.

It's not necessarily being nasty to them back just to quietly ignore it - and if it teaches them a lesson about customer service and taking responsibility, then sometimes lessons have to be learned. I agree, it would be a bit problematic to fight fire with fire and send them a rude email back, but I wouldn't go out of my way to help them.

Strapped

Do they only get paid if the buyer signs the form?

macfly

Some interesting stuff. It seems people's moral stance shifts about in the breeze here. I had one neighbour who stuck out like a sore thumb. Horrible geezer. no redeeming features. He had a heart attack in the street as I was parking up.
Did I and others help him or leave him to "teach him a lesson"?
Have a guess.

soolin

macfly wrote: »

Some interesting stuff. It seems people's moral stance shifts about in the breeze here. I had one neighbour who stuck out like a sore thumb. Horrible geezer. no redeeming features. He had a heart attack in the street as I was parking up.
Did I and others help him or leave him to "teach him a lesson"?
Have a guess.

Are you on the right thread macfly ? We are talking about a lost parcel....

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Do they only get paid if the buyer signs the form?

Royal Mail will first refuse the claim but if the claimant then goes back and says they still wish the claim to be paid, RM will re-open the case.

soolin

ludovico wrote: »

Do they only get paid if the buyer signs the form?

Royal Mail will first refuse the claim but if the claimant then goes back and says they still wish the claim to be paid, RM will re-open the case.

However seller needs to be careful as they are disputing the eBay case which implies they believe that buyer has the item (why dispute otherwise?) therefore I cannot see how they can be claiming the item is lost.

Crowqueen

I think there are degrees of whether we'd bother to help.

Lost parcel and abusive seller - not inclined to help.

Person dying on road in front of you, yes, probably would call an ambulance.

It's up to the individual to judge what is appropriate at the time, but if you apply ethics rigorously you will always have some occasions when you find yourself being contradictory or hypocritical. Most of us have the intelligence to distinguish between the two situations.

JimmyTheWig

I'd do nothing until I had my money back.
Then would fill in the form as best I could. If I was bothered about the name then I'd have to make a decision on that.

And yes, I'd help the person having a heart attack, regardless.

macfly

So our moral choices change depending on who, or the attitude of, the person in front of us is.
What you are all talking about is revenge, not teaching someone a lesson. Intelligence? First get some life experience, then decide if you are fit to sit in judgement, a role you think you are well suited for.
The seller is being objectionable, so be objectionable back. But let's be clear, that makes you both on the same level.