Seller appears on doorstep...

skitler

Flyonthewall wrote: »

I'm pretty sure you already know the type of reply I'd give to that so I'm saving myself the time and effort of actually saying it. We both know it'll just lead to exactly the same conversation again otherwise.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:


I was on a fishing trip, but there not biting.

Ben84

Flyonthewall wrote: »

To start with they had every right to say no to hand delivery.

I do agree, but I also wonder, did it really help them in any way to refuse the item once it was there? I don't see that it did.

Flyonthewall wrote: »

When the guy came he never offered the item for the OP to take.

I'm sure that handing over the item was the whole purpose of his visit.

Flyonthewall wrote: »

They weren't being pushy.

Ok, to be clear I was saying the seller may not have been being pushy about hand delivering it, just mistaken that it wasn't wanted.

Flyonthewall wrote: »

They asked for the service they agreed to in the listing, they expressed surprise when the guy showed and said they thought it was being posted, afterwards it had to be posted as the guy wasn't going to be going by the OP house again.

I doubt that surprise alone caused him to not hand the parcel over, as I understand it the OP refused to accept it.

Flyonthewall wrote: »

They did want advice on what to do after the situation.

They can't change what happened, but they can look at it in different ways. Being angry with the seller for what may have been a simple misunderstanding seems a bad viewpoint, and as for the dispute with the seller's husband. Well, saying you don't appreciate someone's efforts and sending them off to post the item they bought you right back to the very door they'd already taken it to was an excessive response and likely to cause some annoyance. So, I think it would help the OP at this point to reconsider how annoyed they are with them and not get too caught up in being angry about it. Better to focus on not being in that situation again than be angry over events nobody can change now.

Flyonthewall wrote: »

They did clearly say no.

I'm not entirely sure they did. They've not shared the reason why with us and I suspect didn't with the seller either. Sounds like they said no and something about being out for some of the day. Lesson number one in saying no should be - keep it concise and don't add reasons that aren't the actual main reason, it tends to produce confusion as other people then start working around the problem that wasn't the main problem. To a lot of people "Don't come, I may be out" doesn't contain any specific aversion to their actually coming, just a concern they may be out when it happens. So if the seller thinks "Well, I can live with it if they're out..." and so on, they see the problem as having gone away.

Flyonthewall wrote: »

Most people do post items, it's silly to send a message to every seller just in case they may decide to hand deliver it. The reason the delivery is stated in the listing is so that you know how it's being delivered, that's the whole point. You bid/buy if you agree with that, the seller shouldn't assume you want anything else, they should send it how they've said else what's the point in listing a delivery way.

Unfortunately your opinion that the seller shouldn't assume things isn't going to have any effect on what the seller actually does. A message, sent with plenty of time for them to read it, probably will.

skitler

Ben84 wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure they did. They've not shared the reason why with us and I suspect didn't with the seller either. Sounds like they said no and something about being out for some of the day. Lesson number one in saying no should be - keep it concise and don't add reasons that aren't the actual main reason, it tends to produce confusion as other people then start working around the problem that wasn't the main problem. To a lot of people "Don't come, I may be out" doesn't contain any specific aversion to their actually coming, just a concern they may be out when it happens. So if the seller thinks "Well, I can live with it if they're out..." and so on, they see the problem as having gone away.

some good points ben84 and again above is for some the main crux of the post, which I was unable to put across as you have, perhaps because I too go out part of the day . as you say the im not in issue was bogus and not relaying the real reason, op kept saying its irrelevant as to why she said no. I just assumed it was special under garments and embarresment was the issue. many other reasons where given by op as to why folk don't want certain callers but non of which was her reason again adding speculation and then the sign pointing issue was brought in to mask the issue. we know 99% of the case, and as every one knows the devil is in the detail, its like a jigsaw with a piece missing, a part baked cake, or a missing link in a chain.

Flyonthewall

Ben84 wrote: »

I do agree, but I also wonder, did it really help them in any way to refuse the item once it was there? I don't see that it did.

They did not refuse it.

[QUOTE}I'm sure that handing over the item was the whole purpose of his visit.[/QUOTE]

It was but he got angry and left without doing so.

Ok, to be clear I was saying the seller may not have been being pushy about hand delivering it, just mistaken that it wasn't wanted.

No one was being pushy. The seller asked a question, the buyer answered the question, the seller ignored the answer. No one being pushy, just a question that was answered. The guy obviously wasn't pushy either, he didn't even attempt to give the item over (although if he had OP would have taken so no need for being pushy)

I doubt that surprise alone caused him to not hand the parcel over, as I understand it the OP refused to accept it.

Then you've misunderstood. The OP expressed surprise and stated they expected it posted and he got angry at that.

Bad day perhaps, long tiring drive, just a bad temper, who knows. Maybe he assumed by the surprise that they wouldn't take it so didn't even bother to ask/try, maybe he felt his wife had made him do a pointless task that he possibly hadn't wanted to do in the first place so he couldn't care less. We don't know.

We do know though that the OP never even saw the parcel.

They can't change what happened, but they can look at it in different ways. Being angry with the seller for what may have been a simple misunderstanding seems a bad viewpoint, and as for the dispute with the seller's husband. Well, saying you don't appreciate someone's efforts and sending them off to post the item they bought you right back to the very door they'd already taken it to was an excessive response and likely to cause some annoyance. So, I think it would help the OP at this point to reconsider how annoyed they are with them and not get too caught up in being angry about it. Better to focus on not being in that situation again than be angry over events nobody can change now.

The item was posted as it stated it would be originally and as the OP agreed to and wanted.

It is not the OP fault that the guy never offered the parcel, that the seller wanted to save themselves hassle regardless of the OP feelings or that the seller attempted to change the agreement/contract between them.

The OP wanted advice on what to do next. This wasn't some angry rant about what happened or how they can change it, just what is best for them to do now.

I'm not entirely sure they did. They've not shared the reason why with us and I suspect didn't with the seller either.

Then reread their message to the buyer. They copied over exactly what they said. It was very clear they said no and asked them if they'd post it.

They do not need to share the reason, it makes no difference. They said no, that's all the seller needed to know, that is all we need to know.

Sounds like they said no and something about being out for some of the day.

You said you're not sure they clearly said no and know you're saying it sounds like they said no? They said on here that they had an appointment, sure that wasn't mentioned in the message to the seller.

[/QUOTE]Lesson number one in saying no should be - keep it concise and don't add reasons that aren't the actual main reason, it tends to produce confusion as other people then start working around the problem that wasn't the main problem. To a lot of people "Don't come, I may be out" doesn't contain any specific aversion to their actually coming, just a concern they may be out when it happens. So if the seller thinks "Well, I can live with it if they're out..." and so on, they see the problem as having gone away.[/QUOTE]

It was concise. Please read the original message they sent to the seller. In fact, read every comment they've made on here - all their original posts only. No one elses comments or quotes (some aren't full quotes/taken out of context), just their posts. Then reply. It seems you missed some important comments.

Unfortunately your opinion that the seller shouldn't assume things isn't going to have any effect on what the seller actually does. A message, sent with plenty of time for them to read it, probably will.

No, but the seller shouldn't assume things and it is that which may have caused the issue. Point is it's silly to ask then assume.

The seller sent the message the day before and the buyer replied to it the same day.

Ben84

Flyonthewall wrote: »

Please read the original message they sent to the seller. In fact, read every comment they've made on here - all their original posts only. No one elses comments or quotes (some aren't full quotes/taken out of context), just their posts. Then reply. It seems you missed some important comments.

I might have. It's a long thread, but I do recall reading the message to the seller and their saying they had an appointment.

Anyway, a lot of this is just our different opinions. One bit stands out however and seems to connect with much of what we've said - I think the item was offered to the OP. I'd bet good money they had an opportunity, probably several to accept it before he left. He went there to give the item after all. So, did the option go away at some point during the conversation? Possibly, but I also doubt he was keen for it to. Think about it, it would mean a wasted trip, worrying his wife about getting bad feedback, plus extra work and expense to post it later. I expect that the OP only had to say "Ok, please give me the item" at any point during the conversation to receive it. Someone isn't going to abandon the entire purpose of their trip over something as benign as another person's surprise. I think the events become much more plausible if some other emotions were present in their response, and/or they said they did not want the item unless it was posted.

Ben84

skitler wrote: »

some good points ben84 and again above is for some the main crux of the post, which I was unable to put across as you have, perhaps because I too go out part of the day . as you say the im not in issue was bogus and not relaying the real reason, op kept saying its irrelevant as to why she said no. I just assumed it was special under garments and embarresment was the issue. many other reasons where given by op as to why folk don't want certain callers but non of which was her reason again adding speculation and then the sign pointing issue was brought in to mask the issue. we know 99% of the case, and as every one knows the devil is in the detail, its like a jigsaw with a piece missing, a part baked cake, or a missing link in a chain.

Maybe, I don't know for certain and can accept the OP doesn't want to explain it all. So we don't know how relevant it is. My main point was just don't give reasons unless they are genuinely the main reason. It creates terrible confusion all too often.

skitler

Ben84 wrote: »

I might have. It's a long thread, but I do recall reading the message to the seller and their saying they had an appointment.

Anyway, a lot of this is just our different opinions. One bit stands out however and seems to connect with much of what we've said - I think the item was offered to the OP. I'd bet good money they had an opportunity, probably several to accept it before he left. He went there to give the item after all. So, did the option go away at some point during the conversation? Possibly, but I also doubt he was keen for it to. Think about it, it would mean a wasted trip, worrying his wife about getting bad feedback, plus extra work and expense to post it later. I expect that the OP only had to say "Ok, please give me the item" at any point during the conversation to receive it. Someone isn't going to abandon the entire purpose of their trip over something as benign as another person's surprise. I think the events become much more plausible if some other emotions were present in their response, and/or they said they did not want the item unless it was posted.

Ben84 wrote: »

Maybe, I don't know for certain and can accept the OP doesn't want to explain it all. So we don't know how relevant it is. My main point was just don't give reasons unless they are genuinely the main reason. It creates terrible confusion all too often.

im now surprised and confused, to sum id say bewildered as I wasn't aware of the ops surprise at seeing the parcelless knocker that had been declined a personal hand-over of purchased "goods", I was only aware of her pointing to the sign and grimising to the knocker that a conventional postperson do the hand over. it the seller had said it will be delivered at 8-9am then the op would have expected the knock at the allotted and perhaps would not have been surprised


Bad day perhaps, long tiring drive, just a bad temper, who knows. Maybe he assumed We don't know.
as you say just speculation



I fear without a official enquiry this who said and did what and the parcel contents will remain a mystery to all but the op.


I cant find a thread on here about a rebuffed delivery, which could be our knockers side as he to may be a mse-er which would be good to have a knockers view of the ops antics.


so has the op said what was done regarding the feed back which was after all the initial sought advice

Flyonthewall

Ben84 wrote: »

I might have. It's a long thread, but I do recall reading the message to the seller and their saying they had an appointment.

Indeed it is. A long thread which I've been posting in since the start. They did mention an appointment in the thread and they did mention the message to the seller, but they did not mention the appointment to the seller.

Arlandria606 wrote: »

They worded it like this:

"Is it ok if my husband drops this off tomorrow as he will be in that area?"

Definitely a question, not an FYI. For the record, my response was "Sorry to be difficult, but no, it's not okay - please could you post it as you would usually do".

I'd bet good money they had an opportunity, probably several to accept it before he left. He went there to give the item after all. So, did the option go away at some point during the conversation? Possibly, but I also doubt he was keen for it to. Think about it, it would mean a wasted trip, worrying his wife about getting bad feedback, plus extra work and expense to post it later. I expect that the OP only had to say "Ok, please give me the item" at any point during the conversation to receive it. Someone isn't going to abandon the entire purpose of their trip over something as benign as another person's surprise. I think the events become much more plausible if some other emotions were present in their response, and/or they said they did not want the item unless it was posted.

Sure, to most of us it would seem stupid to go around and then get angry and walk off without offering it. But people are unpredictable and often stupid.

The OP was on the guys way, he was going by anyhow which is why the seller asked if he could drop it off. So no real effort involved, just took up a couple of minutes of his time.

He might not care at all about his wifes feedback, he might not even know you get feedback or how it works.

If someone were yelling at me at my door I wouldn't be asking if they had my item, I'd be hoping they'd calm down or waiting until they'd calmed down. If they didn't and just walked off you're not going to yell after the angry guy to tell him that you want the item. It's likely to make him more angry or he'll just get in his car and drive off anyway.

likelyfran

an9i77 wrote: »

If I live in the area I may well hand deliver - usually I'd just do it, wouldn't check first, never been a problem. (Most of the items I sell would go through a letter box so no need to knock on the door. )So in my case this buyer would report me to ebay, prob leave negs etc - which would be a nightmare! Would rather not sell to people like that as it is a liability - could affect ratings etc and more trouble than its worth.

Have you never considered that some people may 'shop' via Ebay so that they don't - for whatever reason - have to have personal contact whilst making the transaction?
No going to shops/going out/whatever, just buy the item online and then expect the postman to bring it.
Obviously it's your way or the highway, as a seller. Hope I never buy anything from you!

likelyfran

an9i77 wrote: »

If I live in the area I may well hand deliver - usually I'd just do it, wouldn't check first, never been a problem. (Most of the items I sell would go through a letter box so no need to knock on the door. )So in my case this buyer would report me to ebay, prob leave negs etc - which would be a nightmare! Would rather not sell to people like that as it is a liability - could affect ratings etc and more trouble than its worth.

Have you never considered that some people may 'shop' via Ebay so that they don't - for whatever reason - have to have personal contact whilst making the transaction?
No going to shops/going out/whatever, just buy the item online and then expect the postman to bring it.
Obviously it's your way or the highway, as a seller. Hope I never buy anything from you!
Oh, and I hope you don't charge for 'p&p' before you hand-deliver 'without asking' and hold onto the money (and complain if you get a neg)!