Buyer responsible for shipping damages


I've seen several ads in recent months stating the buyer assumes any damages occurring in transit. Initially I get frustrated that this blatant contradiction to Audiogon policy is touted so freely.  But then I am reminded that I was probably an Audiogon member for at least 6-7 years, having sold many pieces of gear, before I saw that policy somewhere here.  And at the time it seemed counter-intuitive somehow.  That is what insurance is for !  But then, I thought about buying ANYTHING from the web, and could not imagine any retailer who would balk at taking back some item that arrived at my house trashed.  Why would it be any different for me as a private seller?  So, it seems this is not common knowledge on the 'Gon.  I think Audiogon should make it more apparent to anyone posting a for sale ad.
jimmy2615
if shipping is offered with insurance, than insurance takes care of damages. insurance will always void payments though.
no shipping or arrange your own shipping or pick-up worked best for me.
i like risk=0
Audiogon policy is as stated; shipper/seller assumes responsibility to deliver items in the condition stated at time of sale; just like with a retail purchase. That would make it a very straight-forward, except in the wild wild west, I mean internet, few things are straight-forward.  Unless the parties agree up-front, the standard conditions apply, but there are legitimate reasons to make it part of the negotiation, as long as all of the conditions are spelled out in advance.  A few points to consider before taking a blanket stance one way or the other:
1.  Paypal buyer protection and credit-charge charge backs in general put the seller at substantial risk of fraudulent claims of shipping damage or non-delivery of goods. 
2.  The risk to the seller is made greater due to UPS/Fedex policy of denying virtually all claims, at least at first, due to "inadequate packing" or re-use of shipping materials, or some such nonsense.  I had one claim initially denied by UPS because they said the item weighed more than the burst strength printed on the bottom of the box, even though the box DID NOT burst. 
3.  Some of the items for sale here are VERY FRAGILE, irreplaceable and/or difficult to value.  For example, what about discontinued speakers where one of a pair is damaged and parts are no longer available.  Even if you can get the insurer to agree that a 20,30, 40 y.o. speaker is worth more than 10% of original retail, they will most likely only pay you for one speaker even though a "half pair" has no resale value. 
4.  There is the customs/duty issue raised above.
5.  There are cases where the buyer refuses to cooperate with the shipper's claim procedure. 

Of course the "standard" policy applies in "standard" situations.  But it's not unreasonable to make the "who takes the shipping risk" issue part of a negotiation or condition of sale.  Just like the buyer is free to reject a sale on that basis, there are also circumstances where a seller might reject an offer that does not provide some protection to him or her on the shipping issue.  If you're not comfortable as a buyer accepting shipping risk, then walk away, especially if there the seller cannot provide a reasonable explanation as to why you are being asked to assume that risk. 

Just my $0.02.  YMMV.
The accounting principles as per GAAP are, if seller pays the shipping, then the merchandise belongs to the seller until the buyer takes the possession. Conversely, if buyer pays the shipping, he/she owns it when the merchandise leaves the factory or warehouse. The ledger is entered on that basis and therefore, the responsibility for damaged merchandise depends on who pays the shipping. Having said that, many or most sellers will cooperate to settle the issue as they may have resources that buyer may not. It is always better to establish who does what in event of damage. Check with your accountant if you disagree.