On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, William Robb wrote:
> . It's as much the buyer's
> > responsiblity as the seller's to verify that an item will be
> insured,
> > since it does cost extra to insure expensive items.
>
> Chris, you are missing the major point here, which is, who is
> responsible for delivery of goods or service? If a seller has an
> undertaking with a buyer for goods, and the seller has been paid
> in full, then it is the sellers responsibility to make good on
> the transaction.
Is that Canadian law? I haven't heard that before. What's to stop Canada
Post from arguing that their job was to ship the item to Argentina, which
they did successfully. Are they still legally responsible for items lost
by another country's post office? I have no idea, but it seems unlikely.
Again, I expect that this will be cleared up by the Argentinian post
office, who apparently received the item but didn't pass it on to Albano.
> The insurance is to protect the seller in case of loss, not the
> buyer.
> No matter what happens to the goods, there is a contractual
> obligation on the seller to ensure delivery of product to the
> buyer.
> If the seller cannot do that, then he is obligated to refund any
> monies paid.
Hmmm... never thought of it that way before, but it makes sense. Legally,
though, how can Albano prove that he never received the item? That's what
I'm trying to point out. The seller can show that the item arrived in
Argentina, but Albano unfortunately cannot prove that he didn't receive
it. Obviously we trust Albano implicitly, but if it were another buyer
I can see the store needing more than their word that they didn't receive
an item that successfully arrived in the hands of their country's post
office. That's why I think it's in the hands of the Argentinian post
office, and their response should go a long way towards clearing this
up. I can see why the seller won't refund any money until they hear back
from the post office... that makes sense to me, and I'd do the same. If
the post office admits to having lost it in transit, then ideally they
should cough up the dough. Without insurance, the seller has a definite
moral obligation to reimburse the buyer, but I didn't know they had a
legal one as well. That changes a lot... are you sure about that law?
chris
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
