Reply With QuoteI know, it’s ridiculous. Personally I’d delete sales listings that suggested it to be the case.Originally Posted by noTAGlove
Noticed that some sales posts have this as part of the deal. What’s this all about?
Surely nobody would accept this. Seller posts, but buyer takes all the postage risk. Not something I’d ever enter into.
I actually agree with this as being acceptable, if specifically agreed between the parties.
The oft held concept of the seller being responsible to deliver is fine for a multinational business retailer, but for a P2P private sale the above can work perfectly well IMO. Risk vs return and all that.
Given that nowhere in the U.K. is really *that* far away, if a seller is insistent and it’s a must-have watch, surely the road trip is the way forward? There are worse reasons to get in the car.
I do actually agree that in certain circumstances it’s acceptable although shouldn’t be for the seller’s convenience.
I think it typically arises when it's a watch valued at more than RMSD will insure, and the seller has no other insurance in place.
It's a bit of a throwaway, lazy line, but at least if a seller mentions it any prospective buyer knows what he's getting into and can make a decision accordingly. Better than a watch being sent, going missing and only then the seller falling back on the 'buyer's risk' argument.
Out of curiosity, what insurance is available for one-off, over-RMSD-insured-value packages?
This is how I see it
If I were to sell a watch over the RMSD limit I would look at alternatives and try to come to an agreement / look at alternatives
I would not buy from a seller that states such a clause. Buy the seller etc.
I wouldn’t buy from a seller that stated this as part of the sales pitch.
The seller posts the item and therefore has responsibility to ensure it is properly packaged and insured. How can the buyer accept such a risk - we have seen instances on here of things not being adequately packaged. Insurance claims should be made by the sender too
It says something about the seller too, and trust is key in SC transactions.
don't see a problem here. as a seller I can arrange number of ways how to deliver and buyer is the one who decides to pay more and get in 48 hours or pay less and get it in two weeks. It's a buyer's decision which service to use - insured, uninsured, courier, regular mail or whatever, not my, because of price difference can be quite huge. My responsibility is to pack item properly and forward to chosen shipping company.
hypotethical situation - shipment value is £2700, RM insures up to £2500, if you choose different way to ship, price jumps 3 times. You can send it via RM if buyer agrees/wants, so, where's problem if buyer agrees that he might loose £200 in case shipment goes awol?
Hypothetically, if the price jumps 3x the £2500 RMSD cost, then it would still be substantially less than the £200 lost. I get what you're saying, but so far as I'm concerned, it's the sellers duty to sort that out, not the buyers to take the risk. As mentioned, what if poorly packaged and you end up with a watch that needs substantial service work? What is the extent of the buyers risk? What if the package turns up amd its just an empty box, seller claims that a postie nicked it. Buyers risk?
I may be wrong but I don’t think you’d lose just the 200 you’d loose the lot as it was void
As I understand it. This is the case.
I recently sold, on SC, a watch worth many thousands; far more than RMSD covers. The buyer cheerfully opted to have the parcel sent, RMSD, without insurance, his reasoning? That the risk is in fact truly tiny.
The watch arrived safely , of course. I admire that guy who made a sensible evaluation of the situation .
A business friend, who uses RMSD about twenty times a week, tells me only two parcels got lost in thirty years.
Would you have offered to post it RMSD without insurance with yourself not the buyer taking the risk, given how small the risk is?
So what are the options as an individual posting high value items?
I've yet to find a straight forward option for the additional insurance.
This is exactly what I mean. In my view buyer can choose whatever shipping option he prefers and it is his, not sellers risk.
Offer and acceptance. If both parties are agreeable then surely it is fair...
It wasn’t a condition of your sale though. I assume that this was purely the buyer’s decision
Maybe, but as a non-business seller I would never risk sending by anything other than a tracked, insured, signed-for service. It just isn't worth the hassle.
Another hypothetical example.
Seller posts item fully insured, but it doesn't arrive with the buyer.
As I understand it, the only person that can make the claim with RM is the sender, as they instigated the delivery and paid the postage fee, so the sender can then reclaim the insured amount.
So in theory the sender now has the money for the item and the insured value refunded, but is still under no obligation to pass any of those funds to the buyer as the item was 'posted at sellers risk'.
Seems like a potential 'incentive' to lose the item in transit!
I can understand that some buyers may be happy to take a risk to save a bit, but for high value there's no way I'd accept that risk.
For a low value item like a strap for a few quid it may not be worth it, but not a watch.
As to sellers saying at buyers risk, I'd avoid anyway.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using TZ-UK mobile app
The flaw here is the assumption that ‘risk’ is constant, a fixed amount. It’s not. The risk of a properly packed and addressed parcel failing to arrive with RMSD is vanishingly small...probably less than one in a thousand.
That’s about the same level of risk as being run over when out walking. It’s not a meaningful risk, although of course it could happen. However, you would probably have spent far more in fees over the years than you could save. That’s why insurance is a profitable business.
Now , if it was another, less able, delivery service, I would feel different. But that’s the point....risk varies.
The risk of losing it with RMSD is extremely small - some AD’s send watches and jewellery that way (they are covered on their insurance as long as they send it RMSD apparently). However I personally wouldn’t take that risk, it’s like going on holiday and not having travel insurance, the chances of claiming are extremely small but if something goes wrong paying say £50 to cover £5,000 is a very small price to pay to me.
Risk is interesting.
In my job I deal in high levels of risk constantly, all day long, and for me 'vanishingly small' is not 1:1000; it's 1:100,000 or smaller.
Imagine we're talking about an non-emergency non-life saving operation where you have 1:1000 risk of dying - would you call that 'vanishingly small'? Would you proceed?
However imagine we're talking about a watch valued at £200 having a 1:1000 risk of going missing... I'd take that.
PS I think (and this isnt backed up by hard numbers) that RMSD has to be 1:5000 or 1:10000 of a parcel genuinely going missing whilst inside RM's network?
Posting Permissions