Anyone had luck selling on Preloved?

RainbowDrops

Pink-Angel wrote: »

I know recorded puts buyers off, but I got a lot of people claiming (falsely I believe - there are a lot of people doing this on ebay) that they never received items, which left me out of pocket to pay for postage and then to give the buyer a refund on top.

But you can claim all of the money back from RM, so you wouldn't be out of pocket?

mildred1978

RainbowDrops wrote: »

But you can claim all of the money back from RM, so you wouldn't be out of pocket?

And people wonder why the cost of postage went up so steeply!!

RainbowDrops

mildred1978 wrote: »

And people wonder why the cost of postage went up so steeply!!

Are you suggesting that people shouln't claim their money back if the item went missing in the post?

mildred1978

RainbowDrops wrote: »

Are you suggesting that people shouln't claim their money back if the item went missing in the post?

Not at all. but it's not really fair that RM end up paying out where people *have* received the item and are just pulling a fast one.

soolin

RainbowDrops wrote: »

Are you suggesting that people shouln't claim their money back if the item went missing in the post?

Or is there the old incorrect suggestion that recorded is somehow 'safer' ?

Never mind, as a business I love my competitors being 95p more epxensive than me, on ebay particularly it makes me much higher in Best match and keeps my stars much higher than my competitors who use recorded.

So with my business hat on I should be suggesting that every seller but me use recorded, as that's how I can outsell them at every turn.

On a serious note though, if someone is suffering enough losses to warrant spending vast amounts on a poor service like recorded it might well be worth taking a step back an dlooking at what they are doing wrong. A number of losses suggest an issue with the seller, maybe it is something simple like poor packaging, or poor written addresses or somehting- and should be looked at.

I am currently sending out on average 140 items a month, so by not using recorded that is an extra £133 profit in my pocket every month.

soolin

mildred1978 wrote: »

Not at all. but it's not really fair that RM end up paying out where people *have* received the item and are just pulling a fast one.

If you think all buyers are scammers then it doesn't seem that online selling is really a good idea as it relies on an element of trust.

mildred1978

soolin wrote: »

If you think all buyers are scammers then it doesn't seem that online selling is really a good idea as it relies on an element of trust.

Not all, no. But some, certainly. And perhaps it's more likely when times are harder and people see an "opportunity".

soolin

mildred1978 wrote: »

Not all, no. But some, certainly. And perhaps it's more likely when times are harder and people see an "opportunity".

So why use recorded then?

My 140 parcels this month would have cost me £133, but even someone sending say 20 a month would be paying £19 a month- and if that was cost effective it would mean a very high percentage of dishonest people surely?

Also, what about the people like me who receive a lot of recorded items a month and never ever have to sign for any of them, you do realise if I were a scammer your 95p would make no difference at all.

There's a recession on, times are hard but paying so much money out to protect against a minute possibility of meeting a scammer seems an expensive option.

mildred1978

soolin wrote: »

So why use recorded then?

My 140 parcels this month would have cost me £133, but even someone sending say 20 a month would be paying £19 a month- and if that was cost effective it would mean a very high percentage of dishonest people surely?

Also, what about the people like me who receive a lot of recorded items a month and never ever have to sign for any of them, you do realise if I were a scammer your 95p would make no difference at all.

There's a recession on, times are hard but paying so much money out to protect against a minute possibility of meeting a scammer seems an expensive option.

Are you confusing me with someone else? I have not suggested that using recoded delivery protects from scammers???

My point was/is that if people falsely claim that they haven't received the item then it's RM who lose out. And as a private company that needs to turn a substantial profit to shareholders, it's the service users that pay for it. All of them.

It wouldn't surprise me if fraudulent claims were up a percent or 2 in the current climate. Hence more claims against RM and higher costs to the rest of us.