Who's responsible for delivery?

porto_bello

plumface wrote: »

Additional rights

Customers who buy goods online, by telephone or by mail order have important additional rights. Customers can cancel their order

• any time from the moment they place it, up to seven working days from the day after they receive the goods - even if the goods are not faulty *
• any time from the moment they place it, up to seven working days from the day after they agree the contract with you for services bought online
• and claim a full refund if the goods or services that they ordered are not delivered or provided within 30 days.

So,it would appear to me that when selling online,unless you can prove delivery then legally the onus is on the SELLER.

[/FONT][/COLOR]

All this assumes that the seller has delivered the item to the buyer, which is clearly not the case if the buyer collects an item or arranges their own courier to collect an item.

soolin

I think I'm with Plumface in this if this involves PayPal.

Seller hands over goods to a courier and then buyer claims INR , unless seller has the tracking info that tracks to the address that PayPal gave them they cannot win the dispute . If item gets damaged on way PayPal could go either way, but we all know they generally side with the buyer on the basis that seller did the packing and therefore is technically responsible if item was not packed correctly and was therefore damaged.

RFW

As I said in an earlier post and said elsewhere, Paypal and legal are two different things.

If paid by Paypal the seller is always responsible for proving delivery.

If paid by, for example, bank transfer and the buyer claims non receipt, the seller can tell them to whistle for it.

Paypal is safer as a buyer, but not always so as a seller, certainly not where collection by the buyer or their representative is involved.

porto_bello

Let's please not go down the pay by Paypal, Pickup and launch an INR scam scenario again.

In the case of a collected item, whether a buyer collects or nominates a friend/courier/A N Other to collect, it would always be inappropriate for the seller to accept paypal, since they stand to lose both the item and the payment.

RFW

porto_bello wrote: »

Let's please not go down the pay by Paypal, Pickup and launch an INR scam scenario again.

In the case of a collected item, whether a buyer collects or nominates a friend/courier/A N Other to collect, it would always be inappropriate for the seller to accept paypal, since they stand to lose both the item and the payment.

I think everyone agrees with that here. I can't see a difference though if a buyer pays for a courier and the seller can add the tracking details to their Paypal account. As long as the seller can track delivery there wouldn't be a problem.

plumface

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

As I have already stated in my earlier post, no, paypal are not acting illegally.
You still don't seem to understand the difference between the paypal protection policies and a persons statutory legal rights, and the protection offered by paypal policies are in addition to, and not instead of your statutory rights.

Obviously i dont understand,please can you explain then.
You have a "statutory legal right" yet paypal can 'overide' this with their own "protection policies" which appear to go against your legal rights.:cool:
Scenario:-
Buyer pays for item with paypal,arranges courier for collection with agreement from seller.
Buyer 'signs' document agreeing to 'taking ownership' of property (or whatever it is called in SOGA)
Courier collects.
2 weeks later buyer opens INR case.
Seller cannot prove delivery.
Paypal not interested in 'ownership'.
Seller refunds buyer.
How is this " protection offered by paypal policies are in addition to, and not instead of your statutory rights?"

plumface

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

So to answer the OP's original question.


If a buyer arranges a courier and accepts responsibly for loss or damage before delivery, the seller is not legally responsible for losses.
They will in all probability lose a paypal dispute, but they have the option to attempt to recover their money by legal action.

Change 'probability' to certainly.
So the OP is within there legal rights,paypal will ignore them and you will have to go to court to get your money back! :T

The simple answer is OP, if you sell anything on ebay DO NOT LET THE BUYER ARRANGE A COURIER.(unless they have paid cash!)

PHVideo

I am the buyer, and the item was not received, the purchase was made through PayPal, but not as a purchase for goods, it was sent as "money I owe" (I couldn't see the option for goods) PayPal advises that I cant open a INR case through them as a result of that and stated that I need to open a dispute through my CC company, then PayPal will in turn ask the seller to prove shipping, which they can't do, as Hermes never left a receipt.

That makes me suspicious as when Hermes collects returns for catalog companies they always leave a sticker as proof of collection.

Crowqueen

If you paid by Paypal as a gift payment - which the seller seems to have tricked you into - then there is no buyer protection full stop.

Did you arrange Hermes?

To the above argument: Paypal might make it factually correct that the seller remains responsible, but in the legal argument behind it this is void.

Paypal gives extra protection to buyers, just as it allows claims that would fail through the court system (such as item not received from private sellers, where the legal situation is only that private seller has to prove postage to a court whereas they have to prove delivery to eBay/Paypal). To be honest my parents have acted as couriers to someone else, the sale passed off OK, everyone was happy. But if something goes wrong, which it could well do, the seller is liable through Paypal, which is easier for the buyer to claim through than it would be to launch a court claim.

HOWEVER, Paypal is not a legal instrument or enforcement agency. So when someone asks 'is it legal?', the answer is not 'Paypal says...' but 'SOGA says...' It's OK for Paypal to provide extra protection, which means that sellers have to be aware enough to retain or ask for shipping information when dealing with a courier and not entertain untracked or 'man with a van' collections on behalf of buyers.

It remains the case as written in SOGA remains that the buyer/buyer's agent is responsible for the item's safe delivery, so a court case would fail in this case.

PHVideo

Crowqueen wrote: »

Did you arrange Hermes?

yes i arranged Hermes through Parcel 2 go. was a good bit cheaper than other delivery options (well more expensive now my parcel has gone missing and i cop the loss):mad: