Buyer telling me how much he wants to pay for postage!!

tillycat123

I did actually ask a seller last week if they had there postage correct. It stated £20 2nd class recorded for a pair of curtains.
I politely pointed out that I think they would perhaps be sent standard parcels due to the weight and would they conciser changing the postage to reflect as at most the actual charge was going to be the £8 odd one.

They threatened to report me to ebay! The item did not sell, no wonder.

RHemmings

soolin wrote: »

I assume you are charging for 2nd class packet plus recorded as that equals £3.15. A lof of buyers object to recorded as it basically means you are calling them a scammer, however that is something he should have realised before he bid.

Explain how your £3.15 is made up and leave it at that, but be prepared to have your stars hammered for suggesting they are a scammer.

I don't feel that a seller specifying recorded delivery means that they think that I'm a scammer. I just feel that they're protecting themselves from people out there that are scammers. A listing is not just for me, it's for everyone who might purchase. And there are all sorts of buyers on ebay.

geraint690 wrote: »

I cannot see any point in all these discussions about P&P. If like me, you bid on an item, the P&P becomes part of my bid. As a seller, I would never enter into any communication with a buyer who queries it.

Precisely. A simple way of doing things is to subtract the p&p from the amount I'm prepared to pay, and that gives me my max bid. Although if I think a seller's p&p charges are unreasonable it gives me a bad impression of them and I'm likely to either not bid, or only bid a silly low speculative bid. But I wouldn't enter into discussion about p&p with a seller unless I was asking whether cash on collection was possible.

soolin

RHemmings wrote: »

I don't feel that a seller specifying recorded delivery means that they think that I'm a scammer. I just feel that they're protecting themselves from people out there that are scammers. A listing is not just for me, it's for everyone who might purchase. And there are all sorts of buyers on ebay.



.

You are in effect agreeing with me in that you believe a seller needs to use recorded to protect themselves against scam buyers. Whilst it does not bother you, it bothers a lot of people that sellers think we are scammers who they need protection against.

macfly

soolin wrote: »

No, it is because I want to be able to claim my loss if item goes astray. Up to £46 I am covered standard mail, over that I am not. I understand the difference between protecting myself against rogue buyers and protecting myself against loss, I don't find that distinction difficult- but if anyone does then the postage sticky thread explains what you need to do in case of loss. The fact you asked that shows you do not understand what insurance is for.

As always though sellers can make their own decisions, personally I should be urging every one of my competitors to use recorded as that makes my goods 95p cheaper than theirs and really does help my sales and my stars.

A bit of a patronising answer to a good question.
You know why you send some items tracked - does your buyer know or care? Or are your buyers far more clued up than everyone elses?
There's a huge culture shock coming for anyone anti recorded. Unless you are all selling below £20.

soolin

macfly wrote: »

A bit of a patronising answer to a good question.
You know why you send some items tracked - does your buyer know or care? Or are your buyers far more clued up than everyone elses?
There's a huge culture shock coming for anyone anti recorded. Unless you are all selling below £20.

Some Buyers do care about recorded that's why it is worth having this discussion.

As for possible future changes, we've managed so far with worse, I am sure most of us will manage to adapt.

porto_bello

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the change is simply that the ceiling for compensation for a (free) proof of postage is being reduced from £46 to £20. In other words, whereas before, signed for was required for items of £46+, it will now be required for items of £20+ (unless the seller is willing to run the risk of loss in the postal system).

Adding the cost of 'signed for' to the cost of an item of between £20-£46 is effectively adding an increase of 2%-5% (and that's assuming the existing postage cost is of minimal cost). That's much less than RM annual price rises - hardly 'a huge culture shock'.

soolin

porto_bello wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the change is simply that the ceiling for compensation for a (free) proof of postage is being reduced from £46 to £20. In other words, whereas before, signed for was required for items of £46+, it will now be required for items of £20+ (unless the seller is willing to run the risk of loss in the postal system).

Adding the cost of 'signed for' to the cost of an item of between £20-£46 is effectively adding an increase of 2%-5% (and that's assuming the existing postage cost is of minimal cost). That's much less than RM annual price rises - hardly 'a huge culture shock'.

There has been no official notification it is all still being consulted upon. Whatever RM do we small and medium sellers who do not have other forms of contract with them will all be in the same boat and will adapt.

Personally I found the change to pricing in proportion to be the most hassle so far and on that occaasion I had to drop some of my lines as they became uneconmical to send .

I agree it doesn't seem to be such a shock as some sellers believe, but then quite a few of us have been selling for years and we are used to adjusting our selling practices, anyone would think that compensation levels have remained the same for ever- which is of course nonsense.

porto_bello

soolin wrote: »

There has been no official notification it is all still being consulted upon.

Fair enough, though with a precise proposal being put forward for discussion, the likelihood is that it will be accepted. The thrust of my point was that adding a cost of 2%-5% (or less if the existing postal cost is significant) probably won't make a huge difference to buyer or seller behaviour.

On the subject of the thread title, I've just received a message from a potential bidder, stating that they intend to bid for an item closing today, but want it freepost (the postage cost is a whopping 70p!)

They write in 'text language' but essentially, they state words to the effect that if I don't reply, I am deemed to have accepted their demands. Well, I won't reply, or accept their damands... because I have blocked them!

soolin

porto_bello wrote: »

Fair enough, though with a precise proposal being put forward for discussion, the likelihood is that it will be accepted. The thrust of my point was that adding a cost of 2%-5% (or less if the existing postal cost is significant) probably won't make a huge difference to buyer or seller behaviour.

On the subject of the thread title, I've just received a message from a potential bidder, stating that they intend to bid for an item closing today, but want it freepost (the postage cost is a whopping 70p!)

They write in 'text language' but essentially, they state words to the effect that if I don't reply, I am deemed to have accepted their demands. Well, I won't reply, or accept their damands... because I have blocked them!

I agree and in your position would block them as well.

macfly

soolin wrote: »

There has been no official notification it is all still being consulted upon. Whatever RM do we small and medium sellers who do not have other forms of contract with them will all be in the same boat and will adapt.

Personally I found the change to pricing in proportion to be the most hassle so far and on that occaasion I had to drop some of my lines as they became uneconmical to send .

I agree it doesn't seem to be such a shock as some sellers believe, but then quite a few of us have been selling for years and we are used to adjusting our selling practices, anyone would think that compensation levels have remained the same for ever- which is of course nonsense.

Consulted, then it will come in.
This thread contains a few examples of why some buyers don't like recorded. Though no buyer has yet agreed with the scammer theory. Are they going to start liking it when the RM rules change?
I don't really understand your comment re compensation either. It's never gone down before. And the increases were all minor inflation linked rises.
The shock will come when it takes three times as long to post a packet. Recorded is time consuming.