Becareful of this Ripper while trading here

Everything else about trading. Specific Magiclibrarities Hero and Legends Permanent Lists and Legends External Links.

Moderators: cataclysm80, Apocalypse2K, berkumps, dragsamou, mystical_tutor, pp, hammr7, l0qii

ouallada
Librarities Legend
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:51 am

Post by ouallada » Mon Mar 16, 2009 12:54 pm

magic-belgium wrote:The thing is that the item was paid with Paypal. And Yvel should abide by Paypal's rules, which means he should not empty his account to avoid a chargeback.

French Postal Service is quite good, and after having sold on Ebay (1st seller in value in France for a year), I can tell you that very little mail is lost. I was sending 10 000 packages a month, and 5 to 10 of them were lost. That's 0.01% at most.

If you consider Yvel, the proportion of lost mail is quite bigger, which made me think there was a problem.

What bothers me more here on the forum, is the fact that stu was called a terrorist when he asked Yvel to straighten things up. This is a REAL problem forum-wise.

If I may comment on drag's explanations, as long as you are a webmaster of a website, no matter if you are away from it for a long time, you will always be responsible for it. That doesn't mean however that the webmaster is responsible for lost mail of course, but Yvel's account could have been frozen until things had been cleared.

Yvel offered to trade cards with me on the forum (release cards), I'm afraid I won't trust him anymore unless I get my Oath of Druids back.
To be fair, statistical anomalies can and do happen -- it simply isn't out of the realm of possibility that yvel did send the items, but was a victim of the postal service. Yes, he did call stu a terrorist, but the vast majority of court systems believe in innocence unless proven otherwise, and the title of this thread itself can easily be taken to be libel. Two wrongs don't make a right, but to make myself clear, if yvel's terrorist claims were wrong, so were stu's. At least until yvel has been proven guilty.

From the Uniform Commercial Code, Article 2, section 2-401:

(2) Unless otherwise explicitly agreed title passes to the buyer at the time and place at which the seller completes performance with reference to the physical delivery of the goods, despite any reservation of a security interest and even though a document of title is to be delivered at a different time or place; and in particular and despite any reservation of a security interest by the bill of lading

(a) if the contract requires or authorizes the seller to send the goods to the buyer but does not require the seller to deliver them at destination, title passes to the buyer at the time and place of shipment; but

(b) if the contract requires delivery at destination, title passes on tender there.

The definition of "completion of performance" here is the crux of any argument, and there really isn't any way to objectively interpret it from a legal point of view. As this wasn't a FoB transaction, I would assume that yvel retained title until stu received his items, which makes him still responsible, especially as insurance was explicitly asked for.

User avatar
mystical_tutor
Legendary Old Fart Magic Player
Posts: 3056
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 3:02 am
Location: Colorado Springs

Post by mystical_tutor » Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:45 pm

ouallada wrote:From the Uniform Commercial Code, Article 2, section 2-401:

(2) Unless otherwise explicitly agreed title passes to the buyer at the time and place at which the seller completes performance with reference to the physical delivery of the goods, despite any reservation of a security interest and even though a document of title is to be delivered at a different time or place; and in particular and despite any reservation of a security interest by the bill of lading

(a) if the contract requires or authorizes the seller to send the goods to the buyer but does not require the seller to deliver them at destination, title passes to the buyer at the time and place of shipment; but

(b) if the contract requires delivery at destination, title passes on tender there.
This is quite interesting, I have not seen it before. I will see if I can find this whole document on line someplace.

Am I reading this right though? Can "Unless otherwise explicitly agreed" be fulfilled if I put on my ebay announcement something to the effect "I will ship by whatever method you pay for but I will not be responsible for anything that happenes after I put it in the mail. If this is not satisfactory to you, do not bid on this item."? Seems like if they then bid it is an agreement.
Gary Adkison
Father of a former Wizards of the Coast janitor.

Knowledge is proud because it thinks it knows so much; wisdom is humble because it realizes it knows so little.

User avatar
l0qii
Legendary Unfindable Title Moderator
Posts: 1756
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 7:56 am
Location: PA
Contact:

Post by l0qii » Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:09 pm

mystical_tutor wrote:
ouallada wrote:From the Uniform Commercial Code, Article 2, section 2-401:

(2) Unless otherwise explicitly agreed title passes to the buyer at the time and place at which the seller completes performance with reference to the physical delivery of the goods, despite any reservation of a security interest and even though a document of title is to be delivered at a different time or place; and in particular and despite any reservation of a security interest by the bill of lading

(a) if the contract requires or authorizes the seller to send the goods to the buyer but does not require the seller to deliver them at destination, title passes to the buyer at the time and place of shipment; but

(b) if the contract requires delivery at destination, title passes on tender there.
This is quite interesting, I have not seen it before. I will see if I can find this whole document on line someplace.

Am I reading this right though? Can "Unless otherwise explicitly agreed" be fulfilled if I put on my ebay announcement something to the effect "I will ship by whatever method you pay for but I will not be responsible for anything that happenes after I put it in the mail. If this is not satisfactory to you, do not bid on this item."? Seems like if they then bid it is an agreement.
I put "Insurance and priority shipping are available at an additional cost upon request. Not responsible for packages lost in the mail.".
In my 11 years on ebay I have never been called on it either way.

User avatar
berkumps
Legendary AA Coffin Puppet Master
Posts: 2192
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:56 am
Location: Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Post by berkumps » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:13 pm

l0qii wrote: I put "Insurance and priority shipping are available at an additional cost upon request. Not responsible for packages lost in the mail.".
With regards to Paypal, if you state the above in an auction listing, and the buyer does not elect for insurance/tracking, and then the item gets "lost" and they open a claim, does having this statement in the auction listing protect the seller from a chargeback?

Magik321
Legendary Infernal Contract Collector
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:56 am
Location: Singapore

Post by Magik321 » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:52 pm

berkumps wrote:
l0qii wrote: I put "Insurance and priority shipping are available at an additional cost upon request. Not responsible for packages lost in the mail.".
With regards to Paypal, if you state the above in an auction listing, and the buyer does not elect for insurance/tracking, and then the item gets "lost" and they open a claim, does having this statement in the auction listing protect the seller from a chargeback?
I called them last week. To win a non-receipt claim, you must provide a tracking number that can show the package you sent has the status of delivered. Other ways include showing them a message from the buyer stating he has received the item, or the buyer leaving positive feedback on ebay.

Only by showing the package has been delivered, then you have a sure win case according to them.

User avatar
l0qii
Legendary Unfindable Title Moderator
Posts: 1756
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 7:56 am
Location: PA
Contact:

Post by l0qii » Mon Mar 16, 2009 8:34 pm

Magik321 wrote:
berkumps wrote:
l0qii wrote: I put "Insurance and priority shipping are available at an additional cost upon request. Not responsible for packages lost in the mail.".
With regards to Paypal, if you state the above in an auction listing, and the buyer does not elect for insurance/tracking, and then the item gets "lost" and they open a claim, does having this statement in the auction listing protect the seller from a chargeback?
I called them last week. To win a non-receipt claim, you must provide a tracking number that can show the package you sent has the status of delivered. Other ways include showing them a message from the buyer stating he has received the item, or the buyer leaving positive feedback on ebay.

Only by showing the package has been delivered, then you have a sure win case according to them.
To win a non-receipt case as the seller, you need a tracking number that shows the item was shipped to the verified address. It does not have to show as "delivered". It just happens to be that in the US the cheapest form of tracking is Delivery Confirmation that ONLY tells you whether it has been delivered. I once had a package sent Registered Mail get lost (to Italy). The buyer opened a claim, I provided the documentation, the USPS website showed that the package had left US Customs (which is as far as USPS will track it). I won the case.

Regardless of that, PayPal policy is very different from obligation under law. The entire Uniform Commercial Code (US law) is available online
here for those interested in reading it. Furthermore these can be overridden by state law in some cases. State commerce laws are available here.

As far as I can tell, international commerce law does not deal with individual transaction law, but deals with overall commerce between nations.

stu55
Librarities Legend
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 9:23 am

Post by stu55 » Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:25 pm

I won my case against Yvel, but he removed the funds from his account, which seems awfully shady, like he knew it was coming

random
Librarities Legend
Posts: 388
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 8:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Post by random » Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:26 am

I always transfer my money out of Paypal asap. I'm paranoid to leave it in there. I might be in the minority though.
which seems awfully shady
The shady part is his response and then non-response to the people that have had problems...

Volcanon
Legendary Snooty Caller
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 5:17 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Post by Volcanon » Wed Mar 18, 2009 6:09 pm

I always move my money out of paypal too, mostly because I'm not acutally "paid" until money is in my hands since paypal has been known in the past to freeze people's accounts at random.

That being said, Paypal would just take it out of my bank account if I didn't have enough, and as long as the guy wasn't trying to blackmail me I wouldn't oppose it.

Annorax
Legendary Elder Atog General
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 10:42 am

Post by Annorax » Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:08 am

dragsamou wrote:
magic-belgium wrote:T
If I may comment on drag's explanations, as long as you are a webmaster of a website, no matter if you are away from it for a long time, you will always be responsible for it. That doesn't mean however that the webmaster is responsible for lost mail of course, but Yvel's account could have been frozen until things had been cleared.
Hi Patrick.
I'm not the webmaster of this website, someone is taking care of that part for me.I'm responsable of it, but me or the mods will never be responsible for the trades or sales that took place on it.Now, if a lot of Members have problems with Yvel in the past, they should not trade with him, but he's not the only one concerned, like I wrote previously my inbox is full of different cases, and it's at the discretion of the Members to open a post on the forum to talk about it, most of them do that, once they didn't get a satisfying answer or refund from the Member involved.
You don't have to accept responsibility for transactions on your site to protect your members by banning members who don't take the trading obligations they choose to undertake seriously. No evidence has been posted showing that yvel even tried to send Stu's cards, and yvel emptied his Paypal account so that Paypal couldn't force yvel to refund Stu's money after Stu followed Paypal's non-receipt complaint procedure.

What would be the point of starting a thread to discuss getting ripped off when there are no relevant consequences of being a thief? If a thief is allowed to continue posting and steal again, then there's absolutely no reason for anyone to trade here when there are other forums that make efforts to protect their members by banning thieves. Banning a thief doesn't mean you're accepting responsibility for their actions. This site is your private property, and you can remove anyone from your private property for any reason or no reason at all. You have access to an effective way of keeping thieves away from your members. Why do you choose not to use it?

User avatar
dragsamou
Administrator
Posts: 5657
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 1:17 pm
Location: Paris

Post by dragsamou » Thu Mar 19, 2009 7:25 am

Annorax wrote:
dragsamou wrote:
magic-belgium wrote:T
If I may comment on drag's explanations, as long as you are a webmaster of a website, no matter if you are away from it for a long time, you will always be responsible for it. That doesn't mean however that the webmaster is responsible for lost mail of course, but Yvel's account could have been frozen until things had been cleared.
Hi Patrick.
I'm not the webmaster of this website, someone is taking care of that part for me.I'm responsable of it, but me or the mods will never be responsible for the trades or sales that took place on it.Now, if a lot of Members have problems with Yvel in the past, they should not trade with him, but he's not the only one concerned, like I wrote previously my inbox is full of different cases, and it's at the discretion of the Members to open a post on the forum to talk about it, most of them do that, once they didn't get a satisfying answer or refund from the Member involved.
You don't have to accept responsibility for transactions on your site to protect your members by banning members who don't take the trading obligations they choose to undertake seriously. No evidence has been posted showing that yvel even tried to send Stu's cards, and yvel emptied his Paypal account so that Paypal couldn't force yvel to refund Stu's money after Stu followed Paypal's non-receipt complaint procedure.

What would be the point of starting a thread to discuss getting ripped off when there are no relevant consequences of being a thief? If a thief is allowed to continue posting and steal again, then there's absolutely no reason for anyone to trade here when there are other forums that make efforts to protect their members by banning thieves. Banning a thief doesn't mean you're accepting responsibility for their actions. This site is your private property, and you can remove anyone from your private property for any reason or no reason at all. You have access to an effective way of keeping thieves away from your members. Why do you choose not to use it?
Hi.
As I start to get pissed over that story, and I have No time to loose with any deals that took place on the website that goes right or wrong, I'm gonna ask very simple questions to Stu55 and Yvel:
Stu55:You purchase 2 Misprints from Yvel, for a value of 75$(55.76€) did you request from him an Insurance to cover the loss in case of any problems? Meaning that the cards will be sent by Registrated letter that will provide a 45 Euros refund in case of any problems? Waiting for your answer.Thanks.
Want/Have Lists.
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=8903
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1515
I Love you Dad.R.I.P.

yvel
Librarities Legend
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 1:33 pm
Location: Paris - France
Contact:

Post by yvel » Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:47 am

No.

User avatar
magic-belgium
Librarities Legend
Posts: 1932
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:19 am
Location: Belgium

Post by magic-belgium » Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:48 am

As this is International, I doubt the French Postal system has this kind of insurance on registered mail.

As far as I remember, insurance is only available for parcels...

User avatar
dragsamou
Administrator
Posts: 5657
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 1:17 pm
Location: Paris

Post by dragsamou » Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:56 am

yvel wrote:No.
Hi.
Did you offer to Stu55 to send the cards by Registrated Mail, to cover the loss in case of a problem? If you send him cards by normal way, did you mention to him that in case of problems, no refund will be possible?
Want/Have Lists.
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=8903
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1515
I Love you Dad.R.I.P.

User avatar
magic-belgium
Librarities Legend
Posts: 1932
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:19 am
Location: Belgium

Post by magic-belgium » Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:07 am

stu55 wrote:I asked for Insurance and nothing ever came of that from him
Looks like Stu says otherwise.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests