Shipper is responsible for insurance:Discussion

I think there ARE laws that govern the transfer of title and liability between shipper (seller) and shippee (buyer) whether it be before, during or after the goods are transfered.

Somehow, these laws, Uniform Business Codes and Incoterms, are not used as much when personal goods are involved. Is there a reason for this or are people just not aware?

Sean, how sure are you that UPS would agree that everything they ship insured is their liability for accepting it insured as such? I see too much optimism in that belief or intimation... I've got a $6k case at my employer that speaks volumes otherwise, and it is only a marginal shipper negligence case. Still, I don't think you're making that case so much as having had a reassuring bit of luck in working with them -- not all of us are as lucky to have such claims workers in our area.

I remain skeptical of all shippers, and when the seller is negligent, I find that to be the hardest of situations for the buyer. It's almost like being mugged - the seller and the shipper both can act like they're not on the hook, and your costs to prove either wrong are too high to pursue. Triumph of the system --- and the UPS / FedEx game plays the curve, with their risk pool paying out only the worst and most highly litigated of their mistakes. Buyer/receiver loses.

I suggest to ALL audiogon'ers to DEMAND of their shipper to double-box shipments that such service is appropriate for (anything at all heavy, or already in manufacturer packaging that weighs anything over a couple pounds). Unfortunatley, alot of sellers will pay you lip-service -- but make it clear to everyone that you are expecting xx of service as described, or paying extra for xxy, and that's how it is. And when selling, get ready to accommodate the same.

Do your best unto people, hope for the best unto you. In an ideal world, expect their best as well.

Mike

Agree 100%. Only the seller has control over actually purchasing the insurance. The buyer may be charged for it, but he still can't ensure, heh heh, that the item is insured. Only the seller can do that, and it's then a contract between the seller and the insurer, who has assumed the risk of the shipper. This was discussed on a motorsickle board that I frequent, and the (reasonably large) parts company actually asked a customer to "send the money a second time, until the insurer settled" since the shipper lost the goods. Unbelievable.

From the insurance standpoint, I will tell you how large insurers see it.

Example:

You accept money for goods. You pack the items and take them to work the next day to ship. You make the deposit at lunch, but when you leave after work to ship the item, it has been stolen.

These large insurers view the item as NO LONGER BEING yours, since you were paid for item. The transaction and possession have transpired, ownership has transferred upon acceptance of payment.

I concur, the shipper has the responsibility to file the claim, follow up, and as Sean states, file a release to the buyer since the shipper has NO INTEREST in the unit. By interest, I mean proper authority to make decisions as he/she are no longer the legal owner.

I disagree the buyer has the right or option to choose to follow the claim or demand a refund. If the item has not been packaging properly, then I agree, buyer is 100% responsible. HOWEVER, if packaged properly, or in factory package, I do not feel the buyer should FRONT the money for the refund AND wait for the carrier to make the their decisions.

Unfortunately, in this situation someone has to take the risk, and I, personally, with proper packaging, feel the BUYER is the one to accept the risk. The buyer accepted this risk upon purchase, entering into the possibility of damage during transit. Now, this would be my stance in a 'repair' bill, versus a 'replace' or 'total loss' bill.

As a buyer, you need to be aware of such potential risks of loss, and DEMAND/PAY for security. Proper insurance, proper packaging, and the likes just as the seller should demand such.

I recently sold a Velodyne HGS-18II, FACTORY SEALED. It arrived to its destination, damaged. I did nothing wrong in describing the item, promising proper timeliness of shipping so how can I be held responsible? What if I already owned an HGS-18II that I dropped a Theta Dreadnaught on and cracked one end. Ah, I know, buy one from someone, swap them out upon delivery, demand my refund, and let the poor seller deal with it. THIS HAPPENS!
DO NOT BE A FOOL TO THINK IT DOESN'T.

Someone just purchased a Sony DVP-7700 from me. Unit had some superficial surface scratches on top, nothing major, and came with factory packaging and box. BUYER wanted complete safety, and paid to have the FACTORY box put into a larger box, with added padding/support. Not to mention the size of the box and newly added weight added to the cost of shipping. This is responsiblilty for BOTH parties involved.

As a buyer, I do not like NON FACTORY packaging. RARELY does anyone package properly. It is not cheap, it is not easy, BUT as a buyer AND seller, both need to be aware of the risks of going 'cheap-o'.

Rule of thumb, (does not guarantee safe delivery) buy with factory packaging. If not, BE SURE IT IS DOUBLE BOXED with PLENTY of packaging, foam, and according to the carriers demands.

Dan

I'm a bit confused by Dan's opinion, but it seems to rub me the wrong way. Whether or not the insurance companies recognize the item as the seller's property at the time of loss bears no impact on the moral discussion in my view. Insurance companies and most lawyers (or black-letter law itself) are two steps below snail dung on the scale of morals so I sure wouldn't consider it a noble standard to be held too. Nor would I consider the other immoral example of someone doing a bait-and-switch and blaiming it on a shipper. What the fu*& do dishonest practices have to do with the question at hand?! People get away with robbery and murder too, so does that make it something to strive for? If you purchase an Audio Aero from a dealer, and it arrives damaged, factory packing or not, you would fully expect the dealer to handle the claim 100% and make good on the purchase immediately with a replacement unit. Any dealer who didn't would not be one I'd deal with. The same would hold true with an individual. I own my own business and have for over twenty years now. If I use a third party vendor to complete a task involved with a job, and THEY screw-up guess who's responsible to my client. That's right, it's still ME. I chose to do business with that vendor and if I didn't make good on their mistake to my client I would not be in business very long. If you are agreeing to sell an item through the means of shipping it a distance using a third-party, I believe it should be the sellers burden to deliver the goods exactly as described. The buyer has every right to expect the item to arrive as described, and should not be burdened if it does not. I agree with the observation about factory packing being one good means towards this end, but it does not guarantee safe arrival by any means, especially given the state of ground shipping these days (reminds me of that Samsnite ad with the apes throwing around the luggage in the cage). Double boxing is best with plenty of packing. Even then damage can still occur. I don't care if the seller packs the item in a steel crate with down feathers, if the item does not arrive to the buyer as it was described (within reason) it is the sellers responsibility to make good on the full price of purchase. Period, end of story. I sell and pack and ship my items with that kind of integrity, and fully expect the same from anyone selling something to me through a shipper. I have been on the bad end of damage more than once both as a buyer and a seller and have always conducted my business that way.

Marco