When did the BUYER become responsible for shipping delays?

[Pneumatic_Addict]

Haha 96-00. I'm getting old

He probably saw your avatar and thought “not for this guy”. This would probably yield better luck.

 

[liddojunior]

It’s the sellers job, they offer shipping as a way to deliver their product to the buyer. Either they do pick up only or they personally drive it themselves to you, otherwise they bare the responsibility of shipping issues.

Once the coral is in your hands alive, then it’s your responsibility. If your coral is healthy and extended but you kill it within a few days of having it’s your fault.

But if you sell something it’s your responsibility the product exchanges hands to the buyer. Giving it to the shipping company means the transaction hasn’t completed.

Shipping with a company is the sellers choice, it extends their consumer base further than local only. And comes with risk for the seller.

 

[ptrusk]

Thanks for the response.

Certainly for many logistics type of transactions those terms are spelled out in the contract. In the case of F.O.B. the buyer assumes transfer AT THE POINT OF SHIPPING.

Under the Uniform Commercial Code (Article 2) - FOB is assumed if not other contract is agreed upon. That means that the seller absolves responsibility once the item is handed to the shipper.

Yes FOB shipment is the default, but is arrive alive guarantee FOB?

 

[BeanAnimal]

2) Shipping promise: If the seller explicitly promised overnight shipping and the package was delayed, they might be held liable, especially if the item was perishable (live corals do fall under perishable items).

Only if they were delayed getting the package handed off to the shipper by the cut off time. Again, the default contract (unless otherwise agreed upon) would be FOB according to the UCC.

3) Your specific state may have additional laws protecting you with regards to online purchases, you'd need to look those up.

That may be the case but that is outside the scope of the general conversation.

Now to the meat and potatoes of it all. Consumer protection laws in the US generally favor the buyer, not the seller. Also, the seller has extra obligations when considering the perishable nature of coral. It was also the seller's obligation to give details about their DOA policy and what it covers; the ambiguity of "we have a standard DOA policy" actually favors the buyer since the DOA was never furnished. The fact that the shipping delay most likely killed the coral is not in the realm of buyer responsibility under consumer protection laws.

Unless you can cite the actual consumer protection laws or how they supersede the UCC then that is just conjecture. I don't disagree that the US consumer protection laws favor the buyer.

 

[littlefoxx]

I see both sides of this honestly. Both seller and byer get screwed on DOAs due to delays (if they choose to offer refund or re ship or what not). But I believe that is ultimately on UPS. You pay out the butt for a service they dont provide you, dont get a shipping refund, dont get the coral, and pressure is on the seller to make that right for customer service reasons. Pressure needs to be put on UPS. Ive filled claims, complained to them and all they say is “not my problem”. Like yes its your problem you messed up!! Im so angry with UPS for the crap they pulled on me multiple times I wont buy from people who ship UPS and thats really not fair to the sellers. Crap situation all around honestly. Just my two cents

 

[Mikeltee]

Know a guy that retired from FedEx. 1/2 of 1% of all packages get claimed for lost or damaged goods. It's only a matter of time. I've had live goods shipped probably 20 times. I recently had a $700 frag shipment sit in Memphis for 4 days. Dealer gave full credit. Props to fraghouse coral! Brandon is one of the good guys.

 

[ptrusk]

If the seller says "DOA 2 hours from first delivery" they are responsible. If they say "I don't cover delays" then they shouldn't be bought from.

This is how I perceive it.

 

[Reefering1]

I'm supposed to be doing dishes right now, instead im...

 

[a.t.t.r]

For shippers failure. Yes, the seller is only responsible if they agree to be in their terms of purchase. It may not be comforting and you may not feel it is good business, but that does not change the facts. You are SOL if the seller does not want to cover the loss and the shipper refuses the claim.


You are being obtuse. We are talking about the shipper not fulfilling their part of the contract. It is not the sellers fault no matter how much you want it to be.


No sir - the seller is responsible for packing it as egreed upon and handing it off to the shipper. If the seller chooses to take on more responsibility that is up to them.


unfortunately, they are not responsible for the shippers actions. If the shipment arrives undamaged and on-time and they AGREED to a certain condition, then their responsibility may pick back up there

This is so not true. If ups destroys an item the seller does not get to decide if a refund or replacement is dependent on ups paying out.

 

[UMALUM]

That's up to the dealer. If you don't like the terms, find another dealer. I've been noticing this more frequently too. The only thing to make it revert back is to vote with our wallets. Most people don't read terms. These dealers need exposed!

Problem is

So, I've been looking into consumer protection laws in the US because Bean Animal's stance on this was so out on the fringes of reality that I had to see if there was any merit to it...

1) This would fall under the FTC Mail Order Rule, which outlines basic seller responsibilities with shipping. Under that rule, a seller has an obligation to get the package to the shipper in the agreed-upon timeframe. If no specified timeframe is provided, the maximum is 30 days. So, for this basic rule, it sounds like the Seller accomplished this portion of their obligation.

2) Shipping promise: If the seller explicitly promised overnight shipping and the package was delayed, they might be held liable, especially if the item was perishable (live corals do fall under perishable items).

3) Your specific state may have additional laws protecting you with regards to online purchases, you'd need to look those up.

Now to the meat and potatoes of it all. Consumer protection laws in the US generally favor the buyer, not the seller. Also, the seller has extra obligations when considering the perishable nature of coral. It was also the seller's obligation to give details about their DOA policy and what it covers; the ambiguity of "we have a standard DOA policy" actually favors the buyer since the DOA was never furnished. The fact that the shipping delay most likely killed the coral is not in the realm of buyer responsibility under consumer protection laws.

So, Bean Animal, your assessment that the seller has no obligation regarding this specific scenario is totally baseless, if this ever makes it to court, the OP has a better than not chance of winning the case...

What ultimately buried him was the fact that he stated he would be using UPS overnight shipping. Now if he was honest from the get go and said he would not guarantee the shipment if there were delays he would actually have a leg to stand on. Like I said before plenty of ways to skin a cat. American express says it is.

 

[ReefHunter006]

Bean animal acts like these people are forced to operate in this industry.

Hopefully he sees the amount of people that would choose to never do business with him and learns from that.

The market says DOA or get the fudge out. Those firms that do it right thrive and those that take bean animals approach will not. (Keyword thrive)

Beauty of our system is it doesn’t care who he thinks is responsible. Name the vendor so others are aware.

I would never do business with someone that feels they don’t have the obligation to make sure I get what I paid for.

You choose to build a business shipping corals nationwide, then you assume the risks to do so. Full stop from a market stand point.

If you choose not to, well clearly the market will not reward you for it.

 

[DIYreefer]

This stuff isn't hard. The likelihood of a shipper screwing up is incredibly slim IME. Therefore, in the rare event that they do, I cover it. Simple.

I've always believed that the "not my problem" mindset by sellers when orders get delayed is a mistake. Being that delays are so rare (generally speaking), I think that the occasional loss is far less damaging than the bad reputation one would potentially recieve should the buyer blast them online. Additionally, I just feel like covering the mistake is the right thing to do.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Yes FOB shipment is the default, but is arrive alive guarantee FOB?

I guess it depends on how it is worded.

The whole point here is that one must understand the terms they are working under.

 

[Mikeltee]

Honest dealers have DOAs built in to the cost. I will never again purchase a Coral from a non-reputable dealer. I get burned everytime. Many of them arrive in poor health and shipping shock is blamed and all of them are photoshopped to the max. I paid $100 recently for a JawBreaker that was nothing but an orange mushroom that they edited to be yellow and they even painted in red streaks. Unbelievable what some people get away with around here.

 

[a.t.t.r]

Thanks for the response.

Certainly for many logistics type of transactions those terms are spelled out in the contract. In the case of F.O.B. the buyer assumes transfer AT THE POINT OF SHIPPING.

Under the Uniform Commercial Code (Article 2) - FOB is assumed if not other contract is agreed upon. That means that the seller absolves responsibility once the item is handed to the shipper.

Fob source or fob destination?

Also, wouldn’t really apply when you pay the company to do the shipping seems it would be defaulted to F.O.B. destination. You are not arranging your own shipping.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Bean animal acts like these people are forced to operate in these industry.

Huh?

Hopefully he see the amount of people that would choose to never do business with him and learns from that.

I don't sell online and certainly not to hobbyists. This is not about my business practices. It is just a conversation about the difference between reality and expectation.

The market says DOA or get the fudge out. Those firms that do it right thrive and those that take bean animals approach will not. (Keyword thrive)

Make informed decisions and vote with your wallet. I would not argue any differently and in most cases would not order form a vendor who would refuse to guarantee my shipment.

 

[ReefHunter006]

Huh?


I don't sell online and certainly not to hobbyists. This is not about my business practices. It is just a conversation about the difference between reality and expectation.


Make informed decisions and vote with your wallet. I would not argue any differently and in most cases would not order form a vendor who would refuse to guarantee my shipment.

So then this back and forth is purely semantics and an exercise in decision making?

If true, then I was unnecessarily critical of you and apologize. If not, I fail to understand why this point is important.

If just a thought exercise then I will withdrawal my comment regarding your approach.

 

[BeanAnimal]

This stuff isn't hard. The likelihood of a shipper screwing up is incredibly slim IME. Therefore, in the rare event that they do, I cover it. Simple.

Most of my shipped items problems are are result of shipper issues, very rarely a vendor caused problem. FedEx heavily used contractors now. I would say that at least 1/3 of my "overnight" orders are missed and most non guaranteed orders don't arrive until the last day. I assume issues are regional based on the quality of the distribution center and contractors in the area.

I've always believed that the "not my problem" mindset by sellers when orders get delayed is a mistake.

I too think it is a mistake, contrary to what people here assume I think.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

I see both sides of this honestly. Both seller and byer get screwed on DOAs due to delays (if they choose to offer refund or re ship or what not). But I believe that is ultimately on UPS. You pay out the butt for a service they dont provide you, dont get a shipping refund, dont get the coral, and pressure is on the seller to make that right for customer service reasons. Pressure needs to be put on UPS. Ive filled claims, complained to them and all they say is “not my problem”. Like yes its your problem you messed up!! Im so angry with UPS for the crap they pulled on me multiple times I wont buy from people who ship UPS and thats really not fair to the sellers. Crap situation all around honestly. Just my two cents

The issue is that the seller is the only one who can "put pressure" on the shipper since the seller hired them to deliver the product.

 

[BeanAnimal]

So then this back and forth is purely semantics and an exercise in decision making?

My point from the beginning has been to be sure to understand your terms up front, because the default is not in your favor. Good vendors do the right thing even without the explicit terms forcing them to do so.

It is upsetting when we end up on the short end of the stick, but it comes down to buyer beware.