Ebay Postage Dispute problem [Archive] - Forums @ The Digital Fix

MeCocoNuts

21-01-2007, 10:22

I wonder if you guys can help me with this postage dispute problem.

I bought some £18 'Buy It Now' Aftershave on Ebay that was FREE delivery for the 1st item then supposed to be £3.00 delivery for each additional item thereafter. He had 9 available.

I wanted 5 so bought them all individually as different orders so to take advantage of the free delivery. 5 mins apart. All paid instantly via Paypal.

The seller now says he wants an additional £12 for postage.

My argument is i could have got 4 other members of my family at different addresses to get one each for me. If anything i've saved his postage costs as he only has to send them in one small box.

I could even have bought one bottle at a time over a period of time (which effectively i did but could have been days instead of mins).

Who is in the right here ??? :shrug:

ColinP

21-01-2007, 10:24

IMO, you've bought 5 so need to pay the postage.

The seller is being pretty generous allowing for free delivery at all so when someone comes along and tries to take the **** I think he has every right to ask for the correct postage.

Alan b

21-01-2007, 10:34

Who is in the right here ??? :shrug:

I would say he is. He has clearly stated that you need to pay postage for the other 4 and regardless of where they are going I can't really see how you can argue that you shouldn't as you knew what the score was when you brought them.

caygs

21-01-2007, 10:39

I bought some £18 'Buy It Now' Aftershave on Ebay that was FREE delivery for the 1st item then supposed to be £3.00 delivery for each additional item thereafter. He had 9 available. I am with the others here - he is in the right. From what you say, FREE delivery for the 1st item, £3 for each after that. You have bought 5. The fact that you have done them as 5 seperate orders is immaterial, they are all going to the same address. So you need to pay the £12 for the 4 items that do not qualify.

hookbeak

21-01-2007, 11:18

i think you are right myself, if it was one order then you would have to pay - as 5 orders you shouldn't.

rustybin

21-01-2007, 11:19

I'd go to him hat in hand and say you realise you're slightly in the wrong but would he accept £10.....otherwise just pay the £12.

ColinP

21-01-2007, 11:27

i think you are right myself, if it was one order then you would have to pay - as 5 orders you shouldn't.

I'd disagree strongly. The OP wanted 5 and ordered 5 - regardless of how they were ordered, he should pay the postage as stated in the original description. Otherwise, not only has the seller got more work to do to send these out, he's also taking a hit.

IMO he was being generous enough with the free postage for one and it isn't right that they should be taken advantage of in this way.

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 11:30

I disagree with the previous opinions.

Technically, there is an argument that he could be correct in that he has stated a cost for each subsequent item.

However, there is a generally accepted principle that unless the seller states otherwise, postage is separate on each transaction.[1]

You cannot expect a discount on multiple, separate, purchases unless the seller states this is applicable, so why should you expect the procedue to be any different when the seller is effectively offering a reverse discount?

Of course, the real problem here is that the reverse postage discount is utterly ridiculous.

Certainly it will cost him more to send two or more than to send one, but pro-rata he will save by sending them all at once, so he's obviously two sandwiches short of a picnic to have terms that discourage people from saving him money.

Who fleabay would side with in a dispute such as this is anyone's guess, but I would suspect they would side with you since otherwise they would be opening the door to people claiming they could assume a discount on separate purchases and I'm certain that is a road dwon which they would not wish to venture.

A further point in your favour is that you paid the correct, stated, amount (nill) for postage on each invoice.[2]

How you handle this is another matter. I would email the seller mentioning points 1 and 2 above, and also ask him why he has such a peculiar condition attached to his auction.

Good luck.

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 11:36

I'd disagree strongly. The OP wanted 5 and ordered 5 - regardless of how they were ordered, he should pay the postage as stated in the original description. Otherwise, not only has the seller got more work to do to send these out, he's also taking a hit.

IMO he was being generous enough with the free postage for one and it isn't right that they should be taken advantage of in this way.I very strongly disagree with you.

How can you possibly consider OP is trying to 'take advantage' of the seller?

If the cost of p&p is £3, then if five people each bought one item, the seller would have to spend £15.

Since he has managed to sell five items to one person, there is no way, barring animal stupidity, that he cannot fail to save both time and money in processing the order.

I have never seen anyone or any company have such a profoundly illogical carriage pricing system, so I'm not surprised that it is causing some confusion.

MeCocoNuts

21-01-2007, 11:36

Thanks for all the advice ! I've offered £5 as a good will gesture to put towards the postage of the one box. ......................awaiting reply from seller !

ColinP

21-01-2007, 11:43

I very strongly disagree with you.

How can you possibly consider OP is trying to 'take advantage' of the seller?

If the cost of p&p is £3, then if five people each bought one item, the seller would have to spend £15.

Since he has managed to sell five items to one person, there is no way, barring animal stupidity, that he cannot fail to save both time and money in processing the order.

I have never seen anyone or any company have such a profoundly illogical carriage pricing system, so I'm not surprised that it is causing some confusion.

Regardless of how illogical you think the system is, the fact remains that the seller stated his terms - free postage for one, £3 each for the rest - and the buyer tried to bypass those terms in order to get free postage on the whole lot.

Whether there are other buyers getting free postage for one item is irrelevant. The terms of the sale were as the seller stated and the buyer knew this going in to the deal. He tried to get around the terms and the seller has pulled him up on it.

I couldn't care less what the invoices say - if the seller ends up taking the hit then chances are he'll not bother offering free postage at all in the future and everyone who may have bought from him will lose out.

abarthman

21-01-2007, 11:51

If the OP had purchased the five items simultaneously, he should have been charged £12 postage under the terms of the seller's somewhat bizarre postage arrangement.

But, in the circumstances described, I think each purchase should have been treated as a seperate transaction, so the postage for all of them should have been free of charge.

If the seller had purchased a single aftershave, waited for it to arrive and then bought another, waited on it to arrive and then bought another, etc, would the second, third, fourth and fifth one be liable to £3 postage?

I don't think they would, so why should it make any difference that the OP waited 5 minutes between purchases rather than two or three days?

It costs the seller no more whether he is sending five seperately wrapped aftershaves to one address or to five different address.

And, like the OP says, the it might actually cost the seller less by sending them together in one parcel.

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 12:03

Regardless of how illogical you think the system is, the fact remains that the seller stated his terms - free postage for one, £3 each for the rest - and the buyer tried to bypass those terms in order to get free postage on the whole lot.You are ignoring the standard ebay principle that transactions are separate unless the seller states that the postage costs are aggregated.

In fact you are ignoring the general principle in business that all terms relate to separate transactions unless otherwise stated/negotiated.

Whether there are other buyers getting free postage for one item is irrelevant. The terms of the sale were as the seller stated and the buyer knew this going in to the deal. He tried to get around the terms and the seller has pulled him up on it.He suceeded in getting around the terms because he initiated five separate transactions.

The seller cannot agglomerate the transactions to his own benefit unless he has stated in his terms that he can do this.

Think of it this way: If a supermarket is offering a buy two, get one free offer on some good, and you buy one one day and come back and buy another the next, you cannot demand the free item. You might well be able to get it if you ask nicely, but, because the transactions are separate, you cannot claim the discount as of right.

I couldn't care less what the invoices say Fortunately for the OP, what you care about is neither here nor there,

- if the seller ends up taking the hit then chances are he'll not bother offering free postage at all in the future and everyone who may have bought from him will lose out.You have completely ignored the point I made above that unless he is animal stupid, he cannot possibly need to spend more time or money servicing these five orders from one person than he would servicing five orders from five separate people.

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 12:07

Thanks for all the advice ! I've offered £5 as a good will gesture to put towards the postage of the one box. ......................awaiting reply from seller !I think that's very generous of you.

I couldn't find any auction that matched the criteria you gave. I would have been very interested to see how the bizzare term was stated.

Please let us know how you get on (and, if you can be bothered, post the auction number so we can have a look).

MeCocoNuts

21-01-2007, 12:14

I think that's very generous of you.

I couldn't find any auction that matched the criteria you gave. I would have been very interested to see how the bizzare term was stated.

Please let us know how you get on (and, if you can be bothered, post the auction number so we can have a look).

The seller accepted my £5 good will offer so i'll not post the details of the Ebay listing in case other people take advantage of him. :nuts:

badgerprincess

21-01-2007, 12:27

abarthman

21-01-2007, 12:30

MeCocoNuts

21-01-2007, 12:31

Try this arguement with Amazon.com (for example) if they ever have a "FREE delivery for the 1st item" deal. Have you hear of introductory offers ?

So you never saw the Hellman's Book offer on here for Amazon then ? :lol:

badgerprincess

21-01-2007, 12:31

If you are gonnae do this, I recommend that you use different checkouts, change your jacket, put on or take off your glasses, etc. ;)

lol :thumbs:

deanos

21-01-2007, 12:52

I agree with the buyer, if he bought 5 in one transaction then he would have to pay the £3 each for the extra 4 but he bought them as 5 different transactions so each one should be free

dvds2000

21-01-2007, 13:02

It's pretty hard to tell without seeing the auction and exactly how things were written

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 15:40

Personally this is how i see it...imagine a shop has an offer, buy this item at a bargin price (one per customer). You then try to queue 5 times to keep getting this bargin. That is wrong.

He has just done what many shops do "wow look at this bargin price, you may have one". Takes the **** to try get more at the bargin price. Way I see it (just like a shop) he's using it as a marketing tool to introduce you to himself (this seller) and maybe add him to your favourite sellers and purchase from him again.

This makes him more money in the *long run* than one person trying to scam free shipping on 5 items in the *short term* :)WRONG!

You are comparing a deal in a shop where the shop is trying to ensure an equitable distribution of it's offer item between customers with a term on a sale where the seller is shooting himself in the foot by trying to make it more expensive for customers to save him 'economies of scale' monies on post and packing.

Try this arguement with Amazon.com (for example) if they ever have a "FREE delivery for the 1st item" deal. Have you heard of introductory offers ?I think you will find that if Amazon were to make such an offer, they would be very clear about exactly what they meant.

And I would lay a lot of money on a bet that they would never, ever, ever offer a deal that encouraged someone to buy less product as the seller here appears to be trying to do.

Well done, you ripped him off :P Of course he gave in to you, sellers dont want negative feedback.Wrong again.

He didn't rip anyone off.

If he'd been aware that the seller was so intent on shooting himeslf in the foot, he would not have ordered five items. Nor would any other buyer.

Then the seller would have had to package up five lots of product and pay five lots of postage which would inevitably have been more expensive than sending one larger package.

As it is Coconuts has not only saved the stupid seller time, packaging and postal costs, he's also made him £5 better off through his very generous 'goodwill' gesture.

dvds2000

21-01-2007, 16:02

Wrong again.

He didn't rip anyone off.

I would tend to agree that he has. He was fully aware buying 5 would result in the extra postage costs, and he has got away with paying less than half.

If he'd been aware that the seller was so intent on shooting himeslf in the foot, he would not have ordered five items. Nor would any other buyer.

Or, of course, it could be argued, that if the buyer wasn't trying to rip the seller off, then he would have emailed the seller checking it was ok to buy 5 seperate items and get free shipping on them all.

Then the seller would have had to package up five lots of product and pay five lots of postage which would inevitably have been more expensive than sending one larger package.

Thats hardly the point is it? You don't know the reason for this 'strange' way of calculating postage, it could of course be something to do with the fact you can't send aftershave through the post. He may take the risk it isn't found on one bottle, but on 2+ he may use a courier.

As it is Coconuts has not only saved the stupid seller time, packaging and postal costs, he's also made him £5 better off through his very generous 'goodwill' gesture.

How do you know any of that? How do you know the seller is stupid? You don't know his reasons, and haven't even read the auction! It could also be argued that he is actually £7 worse off.

badgerprincess

21-01-2007, 16:29

WRONG!

You are comparing a deal in a shop where the shop is trying to ensure an equitable distribution of it's offer item between customers with a term on a sale where the seller is shooting himself in the foot by trying to make it more expensive for customers to save him 'economies of scale' monies on post and packing.

Nothing to do with making sure loads of customers can get a certain item. We arent talking concert tickets or games consoles here. Shops do have offers like one discounted item, only one per customer. For example WHSsmith has an offer just now, £1 off any one magazine only one transaction per customer. Would you say WHSmith is encouraging someone to buy *less* magazines? :shrug:

Wrong again.

He didn't rip anyone off.

If he'd been aware that the seller was so intent on shooting himeslf in the foot, he would not have ordered five items. Nor would any other buyer.

Without seeing the auction I cant see the wording, but sounds to me like the seller said/meant one special offer per ebayer. So if the buyer was trying to get around this, then yes he ripped the guy off.

The seller would have had to package up five lots of product and pay five lots of postage which would inevitably have been more expensive than sending one larger package.

That was the sellers choice then wasnt it. Like I said earlier people might keep an eye on the seller for future deals.

As it is Coconuts has not only saved the stupid seller time, packaging and postal costs, he's also made him £5 better off through his very generous 'goodwill' gesture.

Generous my ass :p

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 16:47

I would tend to agree that he has. He was fully aware buying 5 would result in the extra postage costs, and he has got away with paying less than half.Wrong!

He quite reasonably assumed that the normal ebay rule: "you can only agglomerate postal charges across transactions if that is explicitly stated" would apply.

Or, of course, it could be argued, that if the buyer wasn't trying to rip the seller off, then he would have emailed the seller checking it was ok to buy 5 seperate items and get free shipping on them all.Using a pejorative term like "ripping off" seems completely inappropriate in this situation where:

a) There was no attempt whatsoever to mislead the seller.
b) The buyer followed the normal ebay procedure and treated each transaction as an ,er, separate transaction.
c) The seller agreed the final arrangement.

Thats hardly the point is it? You don't know the reason for this 'strange' way of calculating postage, it could of course be something to do with the fact you can't send aftershave through the post. He may take the risk it isn't found on one bottle, but on 2+ he may use a courier.Of course, you can send aftershave through the post. Even if you couldn't, I can see no reason why the buyer should collude with the seller to cheat on the postal regulations.

How do you know any of that? Because there is no other possibility.

How do you know the seller is stupid? You don't know his reasons, and haven't even read the auction! It could also be argued that he is actually £7 worse off.

I think you are just arguing for the sake of it.

Please explain how the seller could possibly be worse off sending one package to one buyer with one set of PP fees (I'll ignore the ludicrous suggestion that you can't send aftershave through the post) than sending multiple packets to multiple buyers with multiple PP fees.

Unless you want to wonder off into the realms of fantasy you will not be able to.

The seller had a completely stupid postage charging structure that anyone who wished to could have avoided with ease.

The buyer, using the standard ebay 'transactions are separate entities' saved the seller from himself, saving him both time in packing separate orders and, money in posting them (unless, of course, you can actually find any courier that will charge more for 1 package weighing 5x than five packages weighing 1x [clue: you won't]).

The seller should consider himself very lucky to get the extra £5.

On another forum which is populated largely by ebay sellers, they were in almost 100% agreement that the seller was in the wrong.

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 17:05

Nothing to do with making sure loads of customers can get a certain item. We arent talking concert tickets or games consoles here.Shops frequently have special offers with limits per customer to ensure that more customers get 'a piece of the action'.

Shops do have offers like one discounted item, only one per customer. For example WHSsmith has an offer just now, £1 off any one magazine only one transaction per customer. Would you say WHSmith is encouraging someone to buy *less* magazines? No, but what they are doing is encouraging people to buy their magazines one at a time. Do you think they have any system in place to ensure that people don't buy one magazine one day and another the next? Of course they don't.

The reason for the 'one transaction per customer' rule there is to stop small traders coming in and buying armfuls of mags to sell on.

Without seeing the auction I cant see the wording, but sounds to me like the seller said/meant one special offer per ebayer. So if the buyer was trying to get around this, then yes he ripped the guy off. If the seller wanted to go against the normal ebay rule that transactions are separate entities as far as postal cost go unless specifically stated otherwise, then he should have been very, very clear about that.

If you buy two items from the same buyer on the same day and no postal discount is mentioned, you have no right to treat the two transactions as one and vary the stated per-transaction terms. I see no reason whatsoever why you believe that this perfectly sound practice should be turned on its head in this case.

That was the sellers choice then wasnt it. Like I said earlier people might keep an eye on the seller for future deals.If you are actually trying to make more work and expense for yourself, it is best that you make this fact extemely clear, otherwise people will assume the normal practices apply and expect separate transactions to be treated as such.

Generous my assBeautifully argued.

badgerprincess

21-01-2007, 17:27

Beautifully argued.

Why thank you :p Have you seen the auction?

I bought some £18 'Buy It Now' Aftershave on Ebay that was FREE delivery for the 1st item then supposed to be £3.00 delivery for each additional item thereafter. He had 9 available.

I wanted 5 so bought them all individually as different orders so to take advantage of the free delivery. 5 mins apart. All paid instantly via Paypal

Ive not seen the auction, but I read this and it says the 1st item is free delivery. Anything else is £18+£3 each. Simple.

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 17:42

Why thank you :p Have you seen the auction?Wooosh ;)

Ive not seen the auction, but I read this and it says the 1st item is free delivery. Anything else is £18+£3 each. Simple.You are once again ignoring the ebay convention that postal arrangements for transactions are separate entities unless the auction specifically states otherwise.

You don't explain why you think that convention should be turned on its head in this case.

In this case, using the normal ebay rules, there were five transactions.

In each case, the first item was free postage.

As you so rightly say: Simple.

Unless you have a convincing reason why the 'separate transactions' convention should not apply in this case, in which case I would be very interested to hear it.

(Note, I would agree that if the seller had stated that he would merge transactions over some specific period for the purpose of enforcing the postage structure he specified, he would be within his rights.

Of course, this situation would never have arisen in that case because nobody would be so moronic to buy five items themselves, They'd simply have got friends and relatives to buy one each. People use ebay to find bargains, not spend money that they can easily avoid spending).

dvds2000

21-01-2007, 18:20

Of course, you can send aftershave through the post. Even if you couldn't, I can see no reason why the buyer should collude with the seller to cheat on the postal regulations.

I think you will find you are wrong

Because there is no other possibility.

Do yo know the seller? Have you seen the auction? If not, then how do you know that?

I think you are just arguing for the sake of it.

No, but you obviously are[/quote]

Please explain how the seller could possibly be worse off sending one package to one buyer with one set of PP fees (I'll ignore the ludicrous suggestion that you can't send aftershave through the post) than sending multiple packets to multiple buyers with multiple PP fees.

Unless you want to wonder off into the realms of fantasy you will not be able to.

I have already gave one possible reason, and as I stated I haven't read the auction so I do not know, but nor do you as you haven't seen it either. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about though as the suggestion that you cannot send aftershave through the post is not 'ludicrous' as you put it, it is fact, why not read the royal mail prohibited items list before calling me a liar. Or is the royal mail site a realm of fantasy?

e seller had a completely stupid postage charging structure that anyone who wished to could have avoided with ease.

As I said, it doesn't really make any sense to me, but rather than making comments like that with no foundation, I would prefer to see the auction first. You obviously know everything the seller put so perhaps you can tell us what the terms and conditions were, or better still send us the link to the auction.

er, using the standard ebay 'transactions are separate entities' saved the seller from himself, saving him both time in packing separate orders and, money in posting them (unless, of course, you can actually find any courier that will charge more for 1 package weighing 5x than five packages weighing 1x [clue: you won't]).

1 aftershave sent 2nd class would probably be about £1.50 max, so 5 x £7.50
5 x aftershave sent courier would probably be about a tenner, using parcel2go or similar
[answer to clue - I did]

the seller should consider himself very lucky to get the extra £5.

He wanted £12 got £5, how is that lucky?

On another forum which is populated largely by ebay sellers, they were in almost 100% agreement that the seller was in the wrong.

So? Almost 100% suggest that some didn't agree, unless you can provide the link to the auction then I fail to see how you can say he was right or wrong. I'm not saying the seller was right or wrong before seeing the auction, just pointing out that there could be reasons why the postage is like this.

cjanderson

21-01-2007, 18:33

well i looked it up

http://www.royalmail.com/portal/rm/content1?mediaId=36200675&catId=400044

Perfumes and Aftershaves
Any Perfumes or Aftershaves that are non-flammable and have an alcohol content of less than 70%vol are permitted. Those that are flammable are prohibited.

i did not know that. but still, makes no difference if 1 or 5. either its okay to send or not, the number makes no odds.

badgerprincess

21-01-2007, 18:35

Wooosh ;)

Stop wooshing. You think I missed you were being sarcastic? :lol:

You are once again ignoring the ebay convention that postal arrangements for transactions are separate entities unless the auction specifically states otherwise.

Are you so sure it doesnt say "Save on postage - buy additional items now from this seller's other listings" at the bottom of the page?
The Buyer took advantage by trying to buy another 4 seperately and thinking he should be due free shipping. Just because you *can* do something (ie he then got 5 invoices saying free shipping) that makes it right. He found a loophole that went against what the sellers Terms said.

dvds2000

21-01-2007, 18:38

i agree - and thats why i stopped selling them on ebay as no one would pay courier prices for it.
Plenty of people will risk sending a bottle through the post though, 5 might get looked at more closely, and seized and destroyed.

I have no idea who is right, or who is wrong as I haven't seen the auction. We don't know if there were terms and conditions covering this or what. Until we see the auction its a waste of time anyone trying to claim they are right.

Bezzant

21-01-2007, 18:40

Surely, irregardless of anything else- even the wording of the auction it comes down to this;

Seller has a offer of first item (1) order of the item is free posting while on any further items ordered it comes at a cost. The buyer has tried to be a smartypants and circumvent this generous offer itself, by making multiple, individual purchases to treat them all as the single item/gain free postage on it.

It's pretty clear cut from what the OP has posted, what was meant and intended by the seller. The buyer certainly knew what it meant enough to try and work around it.

So even if it was a mistake on the sellers behalf, the OP is still pretty dishonest to abuse it in such a way and essentially knowingly rip the guy off.

In my opinion at least..

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 18:51

I think you will find you are wrongNo, you can send aftershave through the post.

There are restrictions based on alcohol content, but you have no way of knowing what the alcohol content of the aftershave in this case was.

In any case, it's a complete red herring. If you actually look at the RM site you will see that it says that any restrictions are based on alcohol content, not amount.

Or is the royal mail site a realm of fantasy?Of course it's not fantasy, but as I've already explained, it's irrelevant because the restriction is based on the alcohol content, not the amount.

1 aftershave sent 2nd class would probably be about £1.50 max, so 5 x £7.50
5 x aftershave sent courier would probably be about a tenner, using parcel2go or similarYou're trying to have your cake and eat it here. Either he can send it through the post, or he can't.

[answer to clue - I did]You did no such thing. You compared a lemon with an apple. You compared an RM posting with a courier posting.

Why would the seller pay £10 to send by a courier if he could send 5 pacjages separatel;y by RM for £7.5.

Your logic makes no sense at all.

He wanted £12 got £5, how is that lucky?He was extremely lucky that the buyer bought five items and then paid him an extra five pounds.

Had the buyer realised that the idiot would try and charge him £12 he would have got 4 of his friends or relatives to buy the items and the seller wouldn't have got the £5.

So he was very lucky to get an extra £5.

So? Almost 100% suggest that some didn't agree, unless you can provide the link to the auction then I fail to see how you can say he was right or wrong. I'm not saying the seller was right or wrong before seeing the auction, just pointing out that there could be reasons why the postage is like this.What you actually have failed to do, right from the word go, is to explain, simply and clearly, why you believe that the normal ebay convention that separate transactions are just that, and that the postal costs are on a per-transaction basis unless the auction specifically states otherwise, should be turned on its head in this case.

Unless and until you do that you can witter on about couriers and how little of the auction you have read until the cows come home.

The rule is: Postage costs are per auction unless otherwise stated.

On the facts as presented here, no such statement was made, so the normal convention applies :)

KennyVader

21-01-2007, 18:55

Seller sounds a bit of a fruit cake. His £18 charge for the first item must factor in postage, otherwise he runs the risk of making losses all over the shop. So I don't understand why he would want to charge £3 more for additional identical items.

Anyway, those were his terms, so I would tend to go with the people that say the postage should be paid. Personally in this scenario I would have emailed him before buying to ask for a postage price for 5 items; if he came back wanting £12, maybe looked elsewhere.

The £5 goodwill compromise was an excellent suggestion.

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 19:35

You think I missed you were being sarcastic?If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ...

Are you so sure it doesnt say "Save on postage - buy additional items now from this seller's other listings" at the bottom of the page? Please explain how paying an extra £3 can possibly be 'saving' on postage.

The Buyer took advantage by trying to buy another 4 seperately and thinking he should be due free shipping. Just because you *can* do something (ie he then got 5 invoices saying free shipping) that makes it right. He found a loophole that went against what the sellers Terms said.You are making a gross assumption there.

You are assuming that the seller stated that the free postage applied to only one transaction per customer.

There are two reasons to suppose that he didn't:

a) It would be an extremely unusual way to word an ebay auction.
b) Had he said that, there is no way someone would have assumed that by making separate transactions he would get free postage.

Without making such fanciful assumptions (Buyer ignores specific information that limit is one per customer and then comes on here and complains about it), one must assume that seller stated simply postage free for first item , £3 thereafter, which by ebay convention would apply to items bought in a single transaction.

I must say, though, that the real problem in discussing this case is that the seller's terms, if interpreted the 'by customer' way would act against the seller's interests (since people use ebay for bargains and if they assumed this is what he meant, they would either spilt the purcase between friends or walk away, thus ensuring the seller always had to package and send each item separately).

Thus we are in the unusual situation that the following the letter of the sellers terms rather than the assumed spirit, is actually in the seller's interest.

dvds2000

21-01-2007, 19:48

No, you can send aftershave through the post.

There are restrictions based on alcohol content, but you have no way of knowing what the alcohol content of the aftershave in this case was.

In any case, it's a complete red herring. If you actually look at the RM site you will see that it says that any restrictions are based on alcohol content, not amount.

Of course it's not fantasy, but as I've already explained, it's irrelevant because the restriction is based on the alcohol content, not the amount.

I didn't say it was the amount. It also depends on if it is flamable, both points that you have no way of knowing either - so is my suggestion still ludicrous or do you concede now that you were wrong?

You're trying to have your cake and eat it here. Either he can send it through the post, or he can't.

No i was simply pointing out that things aren't as black and white as you make out.

You did no such thing. You compared a lemon with an apple. You compared an RM posting with a courier posting.

Why would the seller pay £10 to send by a courier if he could send 5 pacjages separatel;y by RM for £7.5.

I don't know, why would a seller say free delivery for one item but not 2+?

Your logic makes no sense at all.

He was extremely lucky that the buyer bought five items and then paid him an extra five pounds.

Had the buyer realised that the idiot would try and charge him £12 he would have got 4 of his friends or relatives to buy the items and the seller wouldn't have got the £5.

So he was very lucky to get an extra £5.

Of course the buyer realised, thats why he bought them like he did without emailing the seller first. Personally I think the buyer was lucky to save £7.

What you actually have failed to do, right from the word go, is to explain, simply and clearly, why you believe that the normal ebay convention that separate transactions are just that, and that the postal costs are on a per-transaction basis unless the auction specifically states otherwise, should be turned on its head in this case.

What you have failed to do is post a link to the auction to see exactly what the seller said and if there was anything in the T&C about bidding seperately.

Unless and until you do that you can witter on about couriers and how little of the auction you have read until the cows come home.

The rule is: Postage costs are per auction unless otherwise stated.

On the facts as presented here, no such statement was made, so the normal convention applies :)

And until you post a link to the auction you can witter on and troll as much as you like about how the seller was wrong, as you cannot say anything for sure. You seem to have missed the bit in most my posts where i have clearly said I do not know who is right or wrong, I'm just pointing out there might be another side to the story

You say postage costs are per auction, well if this seller has listed 10 items under one auction all as buy it now, then buying 5 of the same item with the same item number is surely the same auction.

Why don't you just post the auction number so we can all see exactly what was stated then we can all make an informed judgement, rather than basing things on an obviously biased post.

splobber

21-01-2007, 19:58

Holy ****, all this over a simple postage issue.

:dork:

esw2002

21-01-2007, 19:59

Probably be fake anyway.

badgerprincess

21-01-2007, 20:07

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ...

Is it made of wood? :shrug:

Mr Twister

21-01-2007, 20:08

Probably be fake anyway.

:lol:

They are tester bottles as the OP (my mate) told me this afternoon.

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 20:13

I didn't say it was the amount. It also depends on if it is flamable, both points that you have no way of knowing either - so is my suggestion still ludicrous or do you concede now that you were wrong?No, it depends only on if it's flammable.

As I (and at least one other) have pointed out: Either you can send it through the post or you can't.

You are trying to fabricate some sort of weird scenario where the seller would have to pay more to send 5 of the same thing to the same address.

Well, I'll tell you something now.

You won't suceed.

If he can send one item for an inclusive price of £18, then (at the very worst) he can send 5 in exactly the same manner to the same address for exactly the same profit per item. Of course, the worst case will not apply. He'll actually be able to do it more cheaply and make a bigger profit.

No i was simply pointing out that things aren't as black and white as you make out. :oh-hum: I've never said they are black and white. They are complicated no end by the seller's terms acting against his own best interests.

I don't know, why would a seller say free delivery for one item but not 2+?Because he's a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic. "(since people use ebay for bargains and if they assumed this is what he meant, they would either spilt the purcase between friends or walk away, thus ensuring the seller always had to package and send each item separately)".

Of course the buyer realised, thats why he bought them like he did without emailing the seller first. Personally I think the buyer was lucky to save £7.A very fanciful assumption. If he had realised, he would either have split the purchase between a few friends or simply walked away.

You seem to have missed the bit in most my posts where i have clearly said I do not know who is right or wrong, I'm just pointing out there might be another side to the storyIt's not so much a matter of who's right and who's wrong as that the seller's terms simply do not make any sense and would always tend to work against his best interest. This makes discussing the situation difficult since what the OP did actually worked out very well for the seller compared to what would have happened if he had known how the seller would respond which would have been to split the purchase in another way so that the seller really did have to do the maximum amount of work and spend the maximum amount on postage.

You say postage costs are per auction, well if this seller has listed 10 items under one auction all as buy it now, then buying 5 of the same item with the same item number is surely the same auction.That's actually a very fair point, but again, it doesn't really get us anywhere since it would just mean that the seller was even more likely to lower his profit by having to deal with 10 different customers rather than fewer buying multiple items.

Why don't you just post the auction number so we can all see exactly what was stated then we can all make an informed judgement, rather than basing things on an obviously biased post.You know perfectly well that the OP declined to post the auction number.

I don't see his post as biased - he simply stated the facts.

Unless he's lying and the seller actually specifically said the postage was on a 'per-customer' basis (and it's hard to see what purpose he would have had in coming here to do that).

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 20:25

Holy ****, all this over a simple postage issue.
Well, it makes a change from:

Ooo, look, they're selling this cheap!
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Might as well move this to suppliers then
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!

Spead over a dozen pages during the course of a couple of weeks.

YMMV!

dvds2000

21-01-2007, 20:26

I assumed you had read the auction from the way you are sure the OP shouldn't have to pay the extra £12, and the way it is being discussed on another forum, was it the OP who started the topic over there too?

It doesn't only depend on if it's flammable, if its not then it has to have an alcohol content of less than 70%.

The OP is obviously biased as he didn't want to pay the extra £12, he might have missed a bit about extra postage, rather than have to be lying about it. It does seem strange he hasn't posted the auction and it can't be found by searching!

It doesn't really matter if what the seller is doing is making any sense or not, if thats what he stated then the buyer should pay, but as we can't read the auction it doesn't really matter.

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 20:28

:lol:

They are tester bottles as the OP (my mate) told me this afternoon.
I got one of those once (not stated as such in the auction) when I bought my g/f some perfume to see if she liked it.

I got 15ml what I paid for 15ml of, though, so I wasn't complaining.

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 20:32

It doesn't really matter if what the seller is doing is making any sense or not, if thats what he stated then the buyer should pay, but as we can't read the auction it doesn't really matter.I think I really have to agree with you.

I just rather took exception at the OP being accused of 'ripping the seller off' when he did nothing underhand and reached an amicable settlement.

I suspect that the seller just didn't think things through. I've seen newbie sellers (and some not so newbie ones) with some very strange terms and conditions.

krayzk

21-01-2007, 20:33

Well, it makes a change from:

Ooo, look, they're selling this cheap!
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Thanks, OP, gone for one
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Might as well move this to suppliers then
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
Got an email saying they're out of stock
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!
******** - I won't use them again!

Spead over a dozen pages during the course of a couple of weeks.

YMMV!

:lol: :lol: :notworthy :notworthy

dvds2000

21-01-2007, 20:41

qpw3141

21-01-2007, 20:52

eBay - Direct Link (http://www.thedvdforums.com/jump2.php?url=http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-1751-2978-71/1?AID=5463217&PID=582776&mpre=http%3A//cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-UNUSED-Hugo-Boss-BOSS-100ml-Tester-Spray_W0QQitemZ130068982991QQihZ003QQcategoryZ29588QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)

:)Well done!

The only trouble is that, possibly because he's now down to one available, I can't see any mention of postage other than the big "Free" and some stuff for international buyers.

Anyway, 1187 feedback: so much for him being a newbie!

molerat

22-01-2007, 09:55

....... I can't see any mention of postage other than the big "Free" .....
The auction has been revised, "postage terms" were changed on jan 15.

I have been on the reverse of this. A seller offered discount for multiples but refused because I purchased them seperately. I think there is no right or wrong in this argument but sellers need to be absolutely clear about their t&c's so there is no room for interpretation.

edit

The postage terms were changed before the op purchased so who knows :shrug:

Andrew70

25-01-2007, 11:10

Is it really any different to breaking up a large order with an overseas DVD retailer to get several discs delivered in customs friendly sub £18 parcels?
Would you contact HMCE afteerwards to offer to pay the duty you avoided by doing this?
You've done nothing wrong by using the system in a way that it allows you to, but you've arguably broken the spirit of the deal.

I don't see that the OP has done anything wrong really. He's examined the terms of sale and placed his orders in the most economical (for him) way.

Highlander

25-01-2007, 11:26

Andrew70

25-01-2007, 11:57

But that was the only way for you to buy the three items and claim the reduced postage, surely?
I assume there was no single auction with the three items and a reduced p&p charge.

If the OP's seller wanted to avoid this he should have stated that he only offered one free p&p transaction per household or something similar.

qpw3141

25-01-2007, 12:16

I'm with the seller on this. I've bought 3 things from a seller before. can't remember the details, but there was a p&p charge and then discounted p&p on the 2nd and 3rd items. However, these were 3 separate transactions, as they were for 3 different things. So, if we're going by the pro-buyers here, I shouuld have paid full p&p on all 3 items? Coz i didn't. I waited for an invoice, and got the discounted p&p on the 2nd and 3rd items.Anyone can exceed what is necessary to comply with the terms of a contract.

Whether your seller stated there was a postage discount or not, he is free to give you one since it is unquestionably to your advantage.

That does not in any way imply that other sellers should or must to do the same, and it most certainly does not allow them to increase the postage charge after the auction.