quote:

---

Originally posted by inca911:
DC proves something was delivered, but not that it isn't the wrong item, or damaged, or .... DC does nothing to compensate anyone for loss, which is the only way to reduce the financial risk.

---

Nothing proves the item was not damaged, or was correct. Is the point not that the sender sent a package, the carrier delivered it, and while in a mailbox or door step or whatever, package was taken or something. If you tell someone to send you a package to Bla,Bla,Bla address, and package isn't safe there... well that is your own fault. Not the senders.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ravidell:
Nothing proves the item was not damaged, or was correct. Is the point not that the sender sent a package, the carrier delivered it, and while in a mailbox or door step or whatever, package was taken or something. If you tell someone to send you a package to Bla,Bla,Bla address, and package isn't safe there... well that is your own fault. Not the senders.

I do agree in the situation that started all this, the sender should have used insurance or something. But, the problem I think a lot of us have is not the fact that we have to get the cards there safely without damage. It is the fact that Delivery Confirmation PROVE that someone got the package. In this situation if Hoosk would have said cards were damaged, or something. I would view this a completely differnt ball game. The part that bothers me is package was delivered, and where the sender was told to ship it was not safe enough, or whatever, and that should not fall back on them.

---

DC proves delivery for purposes of a sender meeting their commitment to send on time and such. On both sides of the discussion, there are items that will bother someone. If the recipient feels it's safe, it should be no problem for them to agree to waive the sender's responsibility. We are all in violent agreement that a theft is the fault of the thief, but a default responsibility must be assigned to either the sender or recipient. Only one of those is physically able to buy insurance, so the sender has been selected. If anyone doesn't like the default, please just agree in writing with your trade partner and change it. I know I personally have changed it hundreds of times in writing for small trades.

quote:

---

Originally posted by inca911:
DC proves delivery for purposes of a sender meeting their commitment to send on time and such. On both sides of the discussion, there are items that will bother someone. If the recipient feels it's safe, it should be no problem for them to agree to waive the sender's responsibility. We are all in violent agreement that a theft is the fault of the thief, but a default responsibility must be assigned to either the sender or recipient. Only one of those is physically able to buy insurance, so the sender has been selected. If anyone doesn't like the default, please just agree in writing with your trade partner and change it. I know I personally have changed it hundreds of times in writing for small trades.

Am I just missing something that makes it difficult to agree with someone on these 7 words: "DC is good enough, no insurance needed" ?

---

The vast majority of trades on MOTL are relatively small, and basically aren't really worth the insurance. That's where a lot of people are upset. In addition, most buyers tend to want to pay as little as possible for shipping, thus putting the burden on the seller again, and making extra pain on that end.

My opinion on this: If it's something you absolutely can't afford to lose, put sig confirmation and/or insurance on it. It really doesn't change how MOTL works in the long run, unless you make it do so.

quote:

---

Originally posted by fluffycow:

@Hooskdaddy: I don't really have to say anything for you to know that you couldn't have handled this situation worse even if you tried, so stop half ass-ing a "good deed", either resend your part in full and tell everyone that it's your mistake and you are manning up to it or tell everyone else to f-off because the decision was in your favor and they can take it up with the mods if they want. Stop trying to minimize your lose while trying to do a "the fair thing". DO IT or DON'T

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hooskdaddy:
You know man. Ive been thinking about this for the last few days. It doesnt matter at this point what I do, people are either going to hate me thinking i ripped the guy off(calling me a thief and a liar in the process), or are going to praise me for going beyond what i had to do and being fair to both of us. But thats life, some days your the windshield, some days youre the bug.
Both of us walked into a bad situation, we both made mistakes during the trade. Currently, even though the case was ruled in my favor, Im paying for them. Ive tried to resolve the case as best I can and be fair to both of us. Im even trying to find the guy 4x volcanics(played) that he could use for his tournament so he doesnt have to buy them. Im doing this even though I dont have to, because its the right thing to do. I highly doubt most of you pointing fingers in my general direction would do the same put into this situation. Just remember when you point a finger at someone, theres 3 pointing back at you.

---

__________________
There's no need to fear, UNDERDOG is here!

All your Gruul Nodorogs are belong to me. Trade them to me, please!

Report rules violations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hooskdaddy:
Both of us walked into a bad situation, we both made mistakes during the trade. Currently, even though the case was ruled in my favor, Im paying for them. Ive tried to resolve the case as best I can and be fair to both of us.

---

Umm..NO. The only person in a bad situation is the sender as he sent and it was delivered and you lost the package. There were no mistakes on his part as he sent with DC and your mistake is that you "FAILED" to take precautions to receive.

Question to Hooskdaddy, You were receiving email notifications that the item was sent out and received email notification of its route. and informed that it would take 4 working days(thought took 5 working days) Why did you not take precautions to ensure saftey of your item been delivered,the day you left for your mothers?

Question to you Hooskdaddy, You received an email that it had been delivered and notified Sender within 2 hours that you in fact got the email notification. Why did you not make the effort to control the package?

quote:

---

Originally posted by inca911:
You absolutely have options to protect yourself! You and the trader can agree in writing that for your trade, insurance won't be used and you aren't responsible for anything if the DC shows delivered. You have the freedom to mutually agree to trade however you see fit. You have the ability to do anything you want to protect yourself. Nobody is forcing you to do anything if you and the other trader agree to do something else. I do not understand the problem of each person having the absolute freedom to decide what level of risk that they feel is best for them.

---

Do you not see how big of a joke this is? You can continue your point to the death, but it still doesn't make sense. Aren't rules supposed to "make sense" at some point?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again because I think it's the most important point in this matter: If the entire point of this rule is to make MOTL safer as a whole, it fails miserably in that regard. It absolutely opens the door for more scams, not less. People now have a 100% proven and easy way to scam someone and get away with it every single time. Before this, they did not.

You keep saying that people have the freedom to mutually trade how they want. Would it not also be possible to have DC (or any proof of delivery) be sufficient to cover the sender's liability according to the rules, and then say that anyone who feels the need to be safer in their trading practices can mutually agree to insurance beyond that? Does that not still allow people to trade how they mutually see fit, yet make more sense for the vast majority of traders and trades? It certainly does to me.

You've also continued to say that the seller is the only one who can purchase insurance and thus protect the shipment. While this might be technically true, it's certainly always been an option of the buyer to offer a few more bucks to the seller so that they can insure the shipment. Any buyer who might have any reason to suspect that their mail delivery system is less than ideally secure could still continue to offer a few bucks more for insurance if they knew DC was all that was needed for the seller to prove that the shipment was delivered. A seller doesn't know what sort of situation their package is headed to, only a buyer knows that. Should it not then be the duty of the buyer to make sure the proper services are purchased for their packages in order to protect them? As it stands now, the rule is tailored to cover everyone for the exceptions, not the norm.

I don't know what else to say. You've got 99% of the community here telling you that this ruling (and rule in general) is a complete joke, and you are the only one defending it (maybe 1 straggler is with you). Is there not a point at which the authority (you) realizes that the people who use and care about this website don't like this, and perhaps you should listen to them and make necessary changes? Your stubborn defense of this without compromise tells me that you care more about arguing your point than making the rules fit the needs of those that use and love this website, and that saddens me.

quote:

---

Originally posted by fwybwed:
Umm..NO. The only person in a bad situation is the sender as he sent and it was delivered and you lost the package. There were no mistakes on his part as he sent with DC and your mistake is that you "FAILED" to take precautions to receive.

Question to Hooskdaddy, You were receiving email notifications that the item was sent out and received email notification of its route. and informed that it would take 4 working days(thought took 5 working days) Why did you not take precautions to ensure saftey of your item been delivered,the day you left for your mothers?

Question to you Hooskdaddy, You received an email that it had been delivered and notified Sender within 2 hours that you in fact got the email notification. Why did you not make the effort to control the package?

Logic...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by nderdog:
Let's focus on the sending rules, leave the personal attacks and issues out of it, please.

---

Maybe I wasn't clear. There is to be no more discussion about the specific trade in question. We need to focus on how to make sure that trading is safe in the future, not dwell on the past.

__________________
There's no need to fear, UNDERDOG is here!

All your Gruul Nodorogs are belong to me. Trade them to me, please!

Report rules violations.

Guess what i signed for the package and it didn't contain the cards you said would be in there.

Now I'm out $1000 because of a Beta Lotus that wasn't in the package.

... Its the risk of trading online, it will never be 100% safe. You just have to hope everyone is honest with you if you are honest with them. I barley do any trades where i purchase delivery confirmation because Its what i can afford to lose. If i don't want to lose something I insure the package.

I had one large issue with a trade, and when i had it the package was insured, the user said they had not receive and Canada post investigated, low and behold my package "arrived" as soon as the investigation started. If it hadn't i would have had the insurance money to give restitution.

If you are scared to trade just use the "I'm not responsibly for anything" clause to protect yourself.

quote:

---

Originally posted by inca911:
Am I just missing something that makes it difficult to agree with someone on these 7 words: "DC is good enough, no insurance needed" ?

---

Hi inca,

I may not have addressed this particular point in my previous post--it was probably part of a draft that I had written and then cut out as being too lengthy and irrelevant to the point I wanted to make before.

The problem here is that, by virtue of it being a default rule, it actually is a hassle to have everyone agree to it, particularly considering the additional rule that one side altering a default policy isn't enough; both sides must explicitly agree to a different term for it to supersede MOTL policy.

I personally can't count the number of times that an international buyer has stopped responding to me after I asked for a waiver of liability when they request non-registered mail. To be sure, this could be for any number of reasons, but at least one of them is likely the disclaimer, as negotiation of all other terms (price and sending order) go smoothly up until that point. I also remember one very specific situation where a U.S. buyer asked for free/cheap shipping but explicitly refused to shift responsibility for the package. Finally, I know for sure there have been several deals just recently (and more prior to this past week) where I asked for a waiver along with their address to confirm, and all I received was the address. Meaning I either have to continue to prod them for the waiver, or just accept that they probably didn't want to give the waiver.

In short, while theoretically it should be easy to get people to agree to this, it isn't always easy in practice. On many occasions, it causes a hiccup in the bargaining of the deal, and it also distracts the parties from what they originally wanted to focus on (exchanging cards for cards/money) and instead end up negotiating what essentially are legal terms.

What the "default Policy" says does matter a lot, regardless of the fact that it still opens different options should the parties agree on them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by inca911:
The suggestion you describe will certainly be considered.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by inca911:
Am I just missing something that makes it difficult to agree with someone on these 7 words: "DC is good enough, no insurance needed" ?

---

It's kind of an odd thing to ask someone, I think. Suppose I sold some cards. I don't want any risk, so I say, "shipping will be $5 with insurance, or $2 without it, but you waive any responsibility on my part if it doesn't arrive safely." While most people here are pretty trustworthy, I think the knee-jerk reaction is, "why would they want me to waive responsibility? What are they trying to pull?" Even though that's not at all the case, it puts a bad taste in someone's mouth before anything has even been shipped.

And I agree with some of the other folks here. Once it gets into my mailbox, I'm responsible for it. If I try to tell my phone company that I didn't pay them because their bill didn't show up, how far will that get me? Delivery Confirmation gives proof that the item was delivered as it should have been, or at the very least, indicates that the sending party has held up their end of the bargain. For me, if someone had sent with D/C and it showed as delivered, even though I might not have it for whatever reason, I certainly wouldn't consider holding the sender at fault for it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by yorib:
All DC shows is that a package was delivered. Doesn't mean it was delivered to the address on the package, or that the sender put the correct address on the package. I don't understand why it's used.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by coasterdude84:
Assuming the sender puts the correct address on it, why should anything more be required? It proves delivery; I don't understand why the sender should be responsible beyond that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by yorib:
If we're assuming a) correct address and b) delivered to the right address, then why bother using DC at all? The only thing that DC guarantees is that a package was mailed. I would like to think that any serious member will mail packages that he says he will mail.

---

Because DC tells us that the package wasn't lost in the mail. MOTL rules revolve around proof of delivery, not proof of shipping.

__________________
There's no need to fear, UNDERDOG is here!

All your Gruul Nodorogs are belong to me. Trade them to me, please!

Report rules violations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by nderdog:
Because DC tells us that the package wasn't lost in the mail. MOTL rules revolve around proof of delivery, not proof of shipping.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by broiler1977:
If a sender writes in his post that he is not responsible for lost or stolen mail, does he get a pass. Can you make that stipulation in a thread?

---

Not at all. If you choose to use rules other than MOTL's default shipping standards, it must be explicitly agreed to in writing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by yorib:
DC does no such thing. If my address is 1010 N. Main St, and the shipper puts 1001 N. Main St., then DC would say the package was delivered, which it was, just to the wrong address. If it does get lost in the mail, the shipper still has to eat the loss.

---

Except when I send a package with Delivery Confirmation, I have to fill out the slip and write the address on it, which does in fact show where I sent it.

__________________
There's no need to fear, UNDERDOG is here!

All your Gruul Nodorogs are belong to me. Trade them to me, please!

Report rules violations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by yorib:
DC does no such thing. If my address is 1010 N. Main St, and the shipper puts 1001 N. Main St., then DC would say the package was delivered, which it was, just to the wrong address. If it does get lost in the mail, the shipper still has to eat the loss.

---

Which is why you can show the green slip they detach from the DC form that you sent to the same place you claimed to do so.

quote:

---

DC proves delivery for purposes of a sender meeting their commitment to send on time and such. On both sides of the discussion, there are items that will bother someone.

---

You seem to be the only one bothered by what happens after a package has been delivered. Only the receiver should be as that is his responsibility. The MOTL community is ok with the sender being responsible up until an item is marked as delivered.

quote:

---

If the recipient feels it's safe, it should be no problem for them to agree to waive the sender's responsibility. We are all in violent agreement that a theft is the fault of the thief, but a default responsibility must be assigned to either the sender or recipient. Only one of those is physically able to buy insurance, so the sender has been selected.

---

YOU have selected the sender. I understand that someone has to make the default rules but they should make logical sense, be intuitive, and hopefully follow standards that other websites that facilitate these type of transactions adhere to. Why not make DC the standard and if someone doesn't agree with that, then they can post in their listing what sending rules they accept. Since we all seem in favor of this and accept what risks there are doing it this way (which is really how we have done things all along), what exactly is the problem?

quote:

---

If anyone doesn't like the default, please just agree in writing with your trade partner and change it. I know I personally have changed it hundreds of times in writing for small trades.

---

See above about why we don't want this to be the default. We want the default to be DC releases the sender of transit responsibility if the package is shown to have arrived. After that, if there is a quarrel with what is received, condition, etc, then the MODs get involved just like they have always done.

quote:

---

Am I just missing something that makes it difficult to agree with someone on these 7 words: "DC is good enough, no insurance needed" ?

---

Yes. That should be the default rule, not a special rule that needs to be agreed to beforehand.