On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Bob Blakely wrote:
> I'm sorry, I thought the seller was in Canada. The point is that the
> seller is responsible. It is irrelavent whether he chose Canada Post,
> UPS, FedEx, his brother-in-law or whoever for shipping. The seller's
> recourse is to the shipper. If the seller does not contract with the
> shipper to insure the shipment, or contracts with a shipper that does
> not insure, the seller takes his chances. He is gambling with the
> buyer's money. Canada Post offers insured shipments. I've used it many
> times. Their policy regarding their responsibility for shippments to
> anywhere is clearly posted. When the seller ships with them and
> doesn't insure the shippment, he is clearly relieving Canada Post of a
> major portion of what would normally be their responsibility for
> shippment security.
Well said. I've always assumed that it was the *buyer* who took the risk
of having an item sent without insurance, as I didn't know that the seller
was legally responsible for it. No difference to me personally, as I
always use insurance unless specifically told not to. But if I'm going to
be on the hook for it, then I'll start using insurance all the
time. Thanks for the heads-up!
> > But how would Albano prove it? The seller can no doubt show proof that
> > they shipped the camera to his country and that it arrived there. Albano,
> > OTOH, of course cannot prove that he didn't receive it. This could be
> > tricky.
>
> This would be irrelavent. Albano doesn't have to prove anything. It is
> the seller's responsibility to put the goods in the buyer's hands and
> be able to show that he did. THE MEANS OF SHIPPMENT IS IRRELAVENT!
Ok, fair enough. That's why I'm saying that it's understandable for the
seller to be waiting to hear back from the Argentinian post office
now, since they're the ones who can tell him whether the item was lost in
transit or allegedly delivered. At this point in time, I don't see that
the seller has done anything wrong, other than ship without insurance. If
the post office can't come up with the item, I think the seller has an
ethical right to reimburse the buyer. If they have the legal obligation
to do that, as you and Bill have said, then it makes it even more clear.
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 .
