Should new member sellers send items BEFORE being paid when selling to "trusted" members? - Page 3

C.O.D.

I've done it a few times, providing my home number and such. I once bought a phone from an italian guy w/ one post, there was NO chance anyone would have bought it from him otherwise.

Originally Posted by jellojoe 

C.O.D.

He can always send you rocks or a bottle of milk...I've seen it happening on other forums.

Just to add a recent experience.  A buyer submitted a payment via Paypal e-check.  Had the item boxed and ready to go waiting for funds to clear.  They did not.  Thankfully I held the package.  Just wasted my time and effort but could have been worse.  So yeah, don't ship anything before payment is received in hand.  My 2 cents.

Anywhere feedback is used to judge 'trustworthiness', the person with few feedback reports has much more to lose than somebody with a lot of (good) feedback.

One negative won't do much harm to somebody with 300 feedbacks and a 100% rating. For a beginner at the game, one bad report can ruin their reputation.  Just to temper the suspicion of new buyers/sellers.

Though I haven't dealt with anyone here, I've bought and sold quite a bit on eBay. I'm moderately cautious (always check feedback, usually email to see how the communication works) and I can recall only 3 or 4 problems in 800+ transactions. People are generally quite honest.

(The current recession seems to be tempting some formerly upright people to become scammers, though.....).

I'd never say I was sending an item before receiving payment. On a few occasions, I have shipped the item before the payment arrived, but I didn't inform the buyer. It's always a nice surprise for the buyer when the item arrives early.

John

EDIT: I'm very suspicious of anybody paying with a PayPal e-check.

Quote:

Originally Posted by acidbasement 

I will only contribute this:

 

 

source:  www.xkcd.com

LMAO!

I'm with the folks who say use Paypal and be done with it.  Just an FYI:  I might be dumping a bunch of cans once the LCD-2's arrive...please don't ask for a ship now and pay (maybe) later deal. 

would not ship an item without payment in full first.

nope, it is everyones responsible to exercise caution and good judgement

ive been buying and selling on the internet for 10+ years now.  (before paypal, before i was of legal age, my first ebay purchase ever, someone trusted me enough for C.O.D. )

ive only been burnt once... and it was for a 50$ auto part that arrived in poorer-than-described condition.  fwiw i never solicit or use the feedback function on any of these sites

if you are uncomfortable with a situation, dont proceed.  if you are uncomfortable with the enormity of a transaction, perhaps internet commerce just isnt for you

What are the pros and cons of sending a payment as gift via PayPal? It seems all FS listings prefer this despite my preference to record the transaction as a payment of goods. The excuse that gifting doesn't attract fees doesn't make sense, as a recent payment I sent through as a gift at the buyer's request attracted a fee that I still had to cough up. Why does it matter to the seller that the transaction is a gift if the amount that clears is the requested amount anyway? Seems like a double shafting of the buyer.

I like the idea of having a trusted third party hold funds for a buyer until that buyer can confirm receipt of goods. Although it sort of falls apart when sellers send items fraudulently with shipping confirmation and tracking. If the buyer has a grievance because the item received was not as described, it'd be for the third party to determine if the buyer is refunded or if payment is forwarded to the seller. Who would want to assume that responsibility?

I think a buy it now eBay listing would be a viable option with some sense of security. In this instance a seller lists the item using a unique heading to prevent other buyers snapping up the item. The seller has detailed item description within the listing to reduce the chance of buyer charge back claim. If there is a dispute, an avenue is available for either party.

Quote:

Originally Posted by olor1n 

What are the pros and cons of sending a payment as gift via PayPal? It seems all FS listings prefer this despite my preference to record the transaction as a payment of goods. The excuse that gifting doesn't attract fees doesn't make sense, as a recent payment I sent through as a gift at the buyer's request attracted a fee that I still had to cough up. Why does it matter to the seller that the transaction is a gift if the amount that clears is the requested amount anyway? Seems like a double shafting of the buyer.

 

I like the idea of having a trusted third party hold funds for a buyer until that buyer can confirm receipt of goods. Although it sort of falls apart when sellers send items fraudulently with shipping confirmation and tracking. If the buyer has a grievance because the item received was not as described, it'd be for the third party to determine if the buyer is refunded or if payment is forwarded to the seller. Who would want to assume that responsibility?

 

I think a buy it now eBay listing would be a viable option with some sense of security. In this instance a seller lists the item using a unique heading to prevent other buyers snapping up the item. The seller has detailed item description within the listing to reduce the chance of buyer charge back claim. If there is a dispute, an avenue is available for either party.

As far as I'm aware, sending as a gift avoids paypal's fees.. correct me if I am wrong.

No it doesn't. I sent a "gift" 3 days ago at the seller's insistence. The fee was $13.64USD and it gave me the option of paying the fee or forwarding it to the recipient. Like I said, if I'm paying the fee anyway why do buyers insist on gifting, when I'd prefer to record the transaction as a payment of goods? It's fishy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by olor1n 

No it doesn't. I sent a "gift" 3 days ago at the seller's insistence. The fee was $13.64USD and it gave me the option of paying the fee or forwarding it to the recipient. Like I said, if I'm paying the fee anyway why do buyers insist on gifting, when I'd prefer to record the transaction as a payment of goods? It's fishy.

Thanks for clearing that up. I'm not sure, if you're paying the fees there should be no reason for gift unless we're missing something (or they are trying to scam).

Yeah to me the insistence on gifting even when the buyer is covering the fee casts doubt. It's like there is NO security for buyers at all. Not only are payments required to be sent first but those payments are sent out without the record of it as a payment of goods. If there is a grievance, having sent funds as a payment may enable the buyer to claim a charge back with their credit card company. I can't see how gifting can provide any security at all for the buyer.

I'm reasonably confident my item will arrive as described but in hindsight I may have been too impulsive. There has to be a better and fairer way to conduct these transactions for BOTH parties.

Using "Gift" as payment is a really bad idea, IMO.  What it means is that if there is any dispute, Paypal will not help, and you will not be able to escalate with them, since you will have "lied" about the transaction.  If the seller wants the buyer to pay the paypal fees, they should just state that, and not have any of this "Gift" hi-jinx.