How to handle this problem with seller? Item was never delivered.

[RAMd®d]

Looks like you are out $150.

BS.


The delivery confirmation for Media Mail is worthless.

BS.


Amazon is going to make you give a refund since there is no proof of delivery.

BS. 0 for 3.


The only conclusion we can draw is that the mail carrier delivered the item to the wrong address, and now it is gone.

Also BS. That certainly is one conclusion and is probably the case, but not the only conclusion. On what evidence is this conclusion based?


...and while I see his point...

What point. That you are somehow responsible for something that may have happened miles away is somehow your fault? BS.


If it really was misdelivered all the guy has to do is ask the postman who delivers his mail if he remembers seeing it

Outstanding idea. That's exactly what I'd do if I was the buyer.

...and it will be easily fixed.

I don't know about that. That's a huge "maybe, maybe not". But apparently the buyer already talked to his carrier and no joy. If I were the buyer I'd be down at the PO talking to a supervisor about this. IF it's really true that she's so bad at correctly delivering mail--

1) somebody should be documenting this
2) nobody should be coming to you for recompense


I feel bad to demand a refund when you so obviously did your part.

The end.

This stinks. I don't think this is a case of misdelivery, though it could well be. I think this is a case of fraud, which would be mail fraud.

The buyer's communication is well crafted and designed to eliminate any possible fault on either of your parts in this transaction and elicit your sympathy, all while blaming the USPS. He then politely demands a refund and states why you own him, having been there himself.

That's total BS.

First, contact your local PO's main office, not a station. Ask to speak to a manager, not just a clerk and tell them what's happened. Ask if it's possible to file an inquiry on the package. Tell him what the buyer said and that you have only his word about the carrier's performance.

If you can't file any kind of inquiry, ask them how to contact the Postal Inspection Service. I recommend this because I believe the buyer is not telling you the truth and you may not be his first victim. And *do* contact the Inspection Service.

Then tell your buyer:

"I'm sorry for your inconvenience, but as you've so carefully noted, this appears to be the fault of the USPS since the delivery is documented. I've completed my portion of the transaction and must reject your demand of a refund.

"I've started a formal inquiry at my Post Office regarding the performance of your carrier and the missing package. Further, I've contacted the Postal Inspection Service and asked them to investigate this matter as well.

I regret there is nothing more I can do for you."

Again, you don't know that anything this guy said is in fact true. It all seems plausible enough, and it sucks if the PO screwed up and he's out of luck. But you did everything you should have. As mentioned, insurance wouldn't have changed anything, except that he'd have to sign for it. Still, that does not impose *any* liability on you. It *might* have, if he requested it, you agreed to it, and then didn't insure it.

It might be a good idea to use Signature Confirmation on big ticket items. Sure, it doesn't prevent misdelivery, but it does give you a bit more leverage in investigating it. If the buyer is willing to pay for insurance, then do so.

If you were a big company and wanted to keep a customer happy, fine. Pay the man. But you don't *owe* him anything, based on what you've posted.

[morlock]

Just going through this logically:

The buyer gave you money for the DVDs and shipping.
You paid for the USPS to ship it.
Barring fraud on the buyers part, the USPS did not deliver the parcel, defaulting on their contract with you. This caused you to default on the buyer, through no fault of his. You are responsible for resolution with USPS, as he had no part in that transaction.
That is how I see it if you boil it down to black and white.

[Jack D.]

Checking the USPS site FAQ on Insurance claims http://faq.usps.com/ Submitting Domestic Insurance Claims Online -> claim requirements -> Section 3 shows this:

o For Items that have not arrived and appear to be Lost in the Mail:

§ Mailer must provide proof of loss for unnumbered Insured Mail only. Proof of loss is not required for numbered Insured Mail, Registered Mail, COD, or Express Mail claims. The mailer must present written and signed documentation from the recipient (such as a letter) dated at least 21 days from the date of mailing, stating the recipient did not receive the article.

So IF the item were insured they MAY have paid the claim. I would think that the $2 for insuring the package would be a lot less painful than the chance of dealing with what you're going through here and I would just include it in the shipping cost as my own piece of mind.

[OWC Jamie]

morlock wrote:
Just going through this logically:

The buyer gave you money for the DVDs and shipping.
You The purchaser paid for the USPS to ship it.
Barring fraud on the buyers part, the USPS did not deliver the parcel, defaulting on their contract with youthe purchaser . This caused you to default on the buyer, through no fault of his. You areThe purchaser is responsible for resolution with USPS, as he had no part inpurchased that transaction.


The only role the seller plays is handling the transaction on his end. Some charge a handling fee for this. Can the purchaser prove the seller did not send the package ?

That is how I see it if you boil it down to black and white.

The purchaser claims (s)he has a well documented history of USPS delivery problems, committed him(her) self to a known poor delivery service anyway and the seller is responsible ?


edit: "All items sold FOB ". The buyer can have the item shipped anyway they want. You can offer to handle whatever shiping means you want as a convenience, if the buyer wants something else they handle it, including picking it up at your freight door.

[RAMd®d]

So IF the item were insured they MAY have paid the claim.

I don't think that's correct. In this case there is proof of delivery which trumps the "lost in the mail" card. If the package *had* been insured, delivery documented, and the buyer claimed he/she didn't receive it, they would still be in the same quandary.


If I were the buyer I would dispute the charge on my card - I ordered something and never got it.

Except that there is the matter of legal documentation that the item *was* delivered. If the credit card company contacts the seller and is aware of the DC, then it's a matter of whether or not they choose to credit your account.


I'm afraid you have to pay since you can't prove you he received it.

You are incorrect. He has proof that it was delivered. He doesn't have to prove it went to the correct address. Now, if somebody can *prove* is was misdelivered, then volcs would have to start a claim procedure, base on that proof.

If you want a *guarantee* of delivery, you need to use Express Mail. That's the only guaranteed service the PO offers.


She's put other people's mail in our box many times, sometimes from miles away on roads I've never heard of (we live in the country).

That's an allegation and doesn't constitute or offer any form of documentation. What we have is documentation of an allegation.

This all boils down to whether or not volcs got the item to the buyer. The PO says he did, the buy says he didn't. The PO has documentation, the buyer doesn't. If there were *no* proof of delivery, it could well be a different story. If we knew the buyer was telling the truth, it may well be a different story.

Again, I don't think the buyer is telling the truth. There is no evidence that volcs did not provide due diligence or collude with the USPS to rip off the customer.

The carrier may have lost, misdelivered, or stolen the parcel. The customer may be lying about the delivery and the carrier (my best guess). These are reasons enough for volcs to contact the Inspection Service and make a report if nothing else.

But I wouldn't pay a dime if I were in volcs shoes.

[abevilac]

If you feel you must pay, why not compromise and pay $75???

[hal]

So IF the item were insured they MAY have paid the claim.

I don't think that's correct. In this case there is proof of delivery which trumps the "lost in the mail" card. If the package *had* been insured, delivery documented, and the buyer claimed he/she didn't receive it, they would still be in the same quandary.
***

you're wrong on this - I've been there and investigated this before - insurance is completely different and includes an internal tracking system (for USPS use only) - it's NOT the same situation at all...

[RAMd®d]

you're wrong on this - I've been there and investigated this before - insurance is completely different and includes an internal tracking system (for USPS use only) - it's NOT the same situation at all...

No, you're wrong.

There is *no* tracking, internal or otherwise of USPS insured parcels, numbered or unnumbered. Insured parcels get the same scans as DC parcels. The only tracking available, internal or otherwise, is on Express Mail.

Parcels with special services *may* be scanned on acceptance, but are scanned on delivery. If a signature is required, a signed record is kept at the delivery office. None of that is tracking.

As I said, it's the same quandary. In either case there would have been a RECORD OF DELIVERY. The end.

Unless somebody could provide proof that the buyer did not receive the item, the proof of delivery (either the Delivery Confirmation or Insurance scan) would stand.

I don't see the USPS paying an insurance claim if there was a record of delivery.

I've been there and investigated as well.

Or better, actually.

[RAMd®d]

If you feel you must pay, why not compromise and pay $75???


An interesting thought.

As mentioned, I believe the buyer is lying and trying to get his/her money back. Therefore, if I were the seller, I'd be loathe to refund anything.

But it might be an interesting exercise to inquire if a $75 compromise would be acceptable to the buyer. The buyer's response to compromise might provide an indication of his truthfulness. My guess is that he would "reluctantly" but very quickly accept the offer.

Paying in the face of proof of delivery seems to me to be a bad business practice. Either you then pay every such claim even though you have proof to the contrary, or you end up trying to decide if the claim is legitimate.