Item missing in the mail, vendor sends an extra invoice.

Forums › Off topic › Item missing in the mail, vendor sends an extra invoice.

1 | 2

floydbloke

3646 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4554

ID Verified

#1434306 25-Nov-2015 08:01

michael001:
richms: Calling you a dick really is something that deserves a name and shame IMO.

Nah. Her business is very small with a small customer base, it'd be pretty easy to cause her problems. She is in a tough spot obviously, I will leave her be.

Fair call, but naming may prevent fellow geekzoners from suffering the same sort of grief with this seller, and as richms pointed out, her behaviour isn't exactly what you'd call professional.

Sometimes I use big words I don't always fully understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#1434312 25-Nov-2015 08:11

I don't get this -- the carriage of goods act provides for this ---although , a requirement is that the address must be valid which may be questionable in this case?

I had an issue a while back where I used the business street address rather than the PO box and the goods did not arrive -- nz post said they don't deliver to business street addresses so intitially stated I was not covered by the carriage of goods act. (the PO box would never have fit my package anyway).

However, they sent 3 'test' letters to the 'business' address and the business received one of them (and returned to nz post) so I ended up being covered (this is they way nz post determines if an address is valid).

It seems my goods ($240) disappeared into the pocket of some NZ post worker. My return address details were on the package and NZ post couldn't believe that the goods were not returned to me and were basically calling me a liar on the phone.

But, I was fully truthful in the onslaught of a very aggressive nz post worker whose attitude was NZ post do not make mistakes.

richms

29098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10208

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1434348 25-Nov-2015 08:45

OP provided their delivery address. Its up to the seller to confirm that their chosen delivery method will get it there.

The NZ post address and postcode checker shows if an address isnt capable of taking postal delivery.

Richard rich.ms

keewee01

1743 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 204

Trusted

#1434379 25-Nov-2015 10:07

richms: OP provided their delivery address. Its up to the seller to confirm that their chosen delivery method will get it there.

The NZ post address and postcode checker shows if an address isnt capable of taking postal delivery.

I would have said it was up to the receiver, not the sender to have provided a delivery address was "valid", and to have confirmed that it is if there was any doubt.

As a seller you would generally expect the person who is ordering from you to know whether the address they were giving was one that NZ Post delivers to. But I can understand if someone was providing a work address and hadn't thought to check if it receives mail delivery.

In the OPs case, where no delivery options were given, you would have hoped the seller actually mentioned delivery method in their auction.

As a seller, on occassion where I've had doubts about an address that has been provided I have checked the address myself and sometimes had to call people out on it and get a different delivery address for them. Sometimes you get wierd situations where NZ Post site claims and address doesn't exist, but the addresses all around them do - in which I still send.

andrew027

1286 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 557

#1434391 25-Nov-2015 10:25

surfisup1000: I had an issue a while back where I used the business street address rather than the PO box and the goods did not arrive -- nz post said they don't deliver to business street addresses so intitially stated I was not covered by the carriage of goods act.

Is this true? Or is it something they have just stopped recently, like only delivering a residential mail a couple of days a week?

I've definitely seen NZ Post delivery people (or whatever the current correct term for "postman" is) with shoulder bags full of mail walking into shops in Lambton Quay and Queensgate Mall with bundles of letters in their hands, so surely these would have been addressed to the businesses' street addresses, rather than a PO box where the business would collect it?

richms

29098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10208

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1434415 25-Nov-2015 10:48

andrew027:
I've definitely seen NZ Post delivery people (or whatever the current correct term for "postman" is) with shoulder bags full of mail walking into shops in Lambton Quay and Queensgate Mall with bundles of letters in their hands, so surely these would have been addressed to the businesses' street addresses, rather than a PO box where the business would collect it?

Depends on the address. Annoying thing is that if a business doesnt get postal delivery to the street address, they will send all mail to that address to a PO Box, at no charge.

Whereas a residential address has to pay redirection, and then list every name that should be redirected. I cant recall all the made up names I have used over the years which is annoying.

Richard rich.ms

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#1434416 25-Nov-2015 10:51

andrew027:
surfisup1000: I had an issue a while back where I used the business street address rather than the PO box and the goods did not arrive -- nz post said they don't deliver to business street addresses so intitially stated I was not covered by the carriage of goods act.

Is this true? Or is it something they have just stopped recently, like only delivering a residential mail a couple of days a week?

I've definitely seen NZ Post delivery people (or whatever the current correct term for "postman" is) with shoulder bags full of mail walking into shops in Lambton Quay and Queensgate Mall with bundles of letters in their hands, so surely these would have been addressed to the businesses' street addresses, rather than a PO box where the business would collect it?

This was the computer lounge store when it was near sylvia park. NZ post said they do not deliver to the street address.Although , in saying that , I think the test letter was diverted to the PO box.

This was a while back now.

I was arguing with them that if they could not deliver to the street address, and could not redirect to the PO box they should have returned it to the sender address.

Anyway, I eventually got my money back 6 months after sending.

andrew027

1286 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 557

#1434450 25-Nov-2015 11:42

surfisup1000: This was the computer lounge store when it was near sylvia park. NZ post said they do not deliver to the street address.Although , in saying that , I think the test letter was diverted to the PO box.

That could make sense - I have definitely seen a lot of mail where the sender has written a business street address on the envelope and NZ Post has handwritten the PO Box number on the envelope and it's been delivered that way.

surfisup1000: I was arguing with them that if they could not deliver to the street address, and could not redirect to the PO box they should have returned it to the sender address.

True. Surely that should be the norm - any mail that can't be delivered (regardless of how it's addressed) should be returned to the sender.

On the original topic of being double charged for an item because one didn't arrive: there may be legislation that says otherwise but I don't think it should be the business's responsibility to check whether an address can receive mail - if the customer provides an address then it should be one that the business can use. If it's not, I don't see how that's the business's fault. It's like if I provide an invalid phone number - I can't blame the business if they don't call me.

I used to do customer service and tech support work for an online retailer whose office was in the UK but who shipped their product out of a warehouse in Hong Kong using standard (non-tracked) mail. Our policy was that if items didn't arrive we'd confirm the delivery address then send a replacement item and the write the original off. If the second item also didn't arrive we'd just refund them (even though sometimes I got the feeling that one or both actually had arrived and we were being scammed).

Sometimes the customer would email us saying that both items had turned up so we'd send a Royal Mail pre-paid envelope for the customer to return one to the UK office. If the delivery address was non-UK we'd get the customer to send one back at their expense and when it arrived we'd email them a voucher number, for the value of the postage, that they could redeem against a future order.

Paul1977

5171 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2192

#1434531 25-Nov-2015 12:45

andrew027: On the original topic of being double charged for an item because one didn't arrive: there may be legislation that says otherwise but I don't think it should be the business's responsibility to check whether an address can receive mail - if the customer provides an address then it should be one that the business can use. If it's not, I don't see how that's the business's fault. It's like if I provide an invalid phone number - I can't blame the business if they don't call me.

But in this case the the buyer wasn't given a choice of delivery method. If the seller doesn't give delivery options and doesn't make it clear what the delivery method will be, then I think the seller is the one who has the responsibility of ensuring their chosen delivery method is valid for the buyers address.

keewee01

1743 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 204

Trusted

#1434535 25-Nov-2015 12:51

Paul1977:
andrew027: On the original topic of being double charged for an item because one didn't arrive: there may be legislation that says otherwise but I don't think it should be the business's responsibility to check whether an address can receive mail - if the customer provides an address then it should be one that the business can use. If it's not, I don't see how that's the business's fault. It's like if I provide an invalid phone number - I can't blame the business if they don't call me.

But in this case the the buyer wasn't given a choice of delivery method. If the seller doesn't give delivery options and doesn't make it clear what the delivery method will be, then I think the seller is the one who has the responsibility of ensuring their chosen delivery method is valid for the buyers address.

Fault on boths sides then I think - the seller for poor/lack of information on delivery method, and the buyer for not asking the question knowing that no options shown. More so the seller for poor business practise.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1443 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 910

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1435922 27-Nov-2015 11:18

keewee01:
Paul1977:
andrew027: On the original topic of being double charged for an item because one didn't arrive: there may be legislation that says otherwise but I don't think it should be the business's responsibility to check whether an address can receive mail - if the customer provides an address then it should be one that the business can use. If it's not, I don't see how that's the business's fault. It's like if I provide an invalid phone number - I can't blame the business if they don't call me.

But in this case the the buyer wasn't given a choice of delivery method. If the seller doesn't give delivery options and doesn't make it clear what the delivery method will be, then I think the seller is the one who has the responsibility of ensuring their chosen delivery method is valid for the buyers address.

Fault on boths sides then I think - the seller for poor/lack of information on delivery method, and the buyer for not asking the question knowing that no options shown. More so the seller for poor business practise.

I don't think so, This straight from Citizens advice:

"For goods bought on or after 17 June 2014 from a New Zealand based trader, where the seller has arranged the delivery, the seller is responsible for ensuring that the goods are delivered on time"

Found it:
5A Guarantee as to delivery

(1) Where a supplier is responsible for delivering, or for arranging for the delivery of, goods to a consumer there is a guarantee that the goods will be received by the consumer—
- (a) at a time, or within a period, agreed between the supplier and the consumer; or
- (b) if no time or period has been agreed, within a reasonable time.
(2) Where the delivery of the goods fails to comply with the guarantee under this section, Part 2 gives the consumer a right of redress against the supplier and, in that case, the consumer may,—
- (a) if the failure is of a substantial character, reject the goods under section 18(3); and
- (b) in any case, obtain damages under section 18(4) (other than damages relating to the remedies set out in section 18(2)), whether or not the consumer also rejects the goods.
...

Matthew

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

keewee01

1743 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 204

Trusted

#1435961 27-Nov-2015 12:14

mdooher:
keewee01:
Paul1977:
andrew027: On the original topic of being double charged for an item because one didn't arrive: there may be legislation that says otherwise but I don't think it should be the business's responsibility to check whether an address can receive mail - if the customer provides an address then it should be one that the business can use. If it's not, I don't see how that's the business's fault. It's like if I provide an invalid phone number - I can't blame the business if they don't call me.

But in this case the the buyer wasn't given a choice of delivery method. If the seller doesn't give delivery options and doesn't make it clear what the delivery method will be, then I think the seller is the one who has the responsibility of ensuring their chosen delivery method is valid for the buyers address.

Fault on boths sides then I think - the seller for poor/lack of information on delivery method, and the buyer for not asking the question knowing that no options shown. More so the seller for poor business practise.

I don't think so, This straight from Citizens advice:

"For goods bought on or after 17 June 2014 from a New Zealand based trader, where the seller has arranged the delivery, the seller is responsible for ensuring that the goods are delivered on time"

Found it:
5A Guarantee as to delivery

(1) Where a supplier is responsible for delivering, or for arranging for the delivery of, goods to a consumer there is a guarantee that the goods will be received by the consumer—

(a) at a time, or within a period, agreed between the supplier and the consumer; or

(b) if no time or period has been agreed, within a reasonable time.
(2) Where the delivery of the goods fails to comply with the guarantee under this section, Part 2 gives the consumer a right of redress against the supplier and, in that case, the consumer may,—

(a) if the failure is of a substantial character, reject the goods under section 18(3); and

(b) in any case, obtain damages under section 18(4) (other than damages relating to the remedies set out in section 18(2)), whether or not the consumer also rejects the goods.
...

So it was the sellers fault they were provided with (by the buyer) an address that was not an accepted delivery address! Silly seller

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1443 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 910

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1435964 27-Nov-2015 12:19

keewee01:
mdooher:
keewee01:
Paul1977:
andrew027: On the original topic of being double charged for an item because one didn't arrive: there may be legislation that says otherwise but I don't think it should be the business's responsibility to check whether an address can receive mail - if the customer provides an address then it should be one that the business can use. If it's not, I don't see how that's the business's fault. It's like if I provide an invalid phone number - I can't blame the business if they don't call me.

But in this case the the buyer wasn't given a choice of delivery method. If the seller doesn't give delivery options and doesn't make it clear what the delivery method will be, then I think the seller is the one who has the responsibility of ensuring their chosen delivery method is valid for the buyers address.

Fault on boths sides then I think - the seller for poor/lack of information on delivery method, and the buyer for not asking the question knowing that no options shown. More so the seller for poor business practise.

I don't think so, This straight from Citizens advice:

"For goods bought on or after 17 June 2014 from a New Zealand based trader, where the seller has arranged the delivery, the seller is responsible for ensuring that the goods are delivered on time"

Found it:
5A Guarantee as to delivery

(1) Where a supplier is responsible for delivering, or for arranging for the delivery of, goods to a consumer there is a guarantee that the goods will be received by the consumer—

(a) at a time, or within a period, agreed between the supplier and the consumer; or

(b) if no time or period has been agreed, within a reasonable time.
(2) Where the delivery of the goods fails to comply with the guarantee under this section, Part 2 gives the consumer a right of redress against the supplier and, in that case, the consumer may,—

(a) if the failure is of a substantial character, reject the goods under section 18(3); and

(b) in any case, obtain damages under section 18(4) (other than damages relating to the remedies set out in section 18(2)), whether or not the consumer also rejects the goods.
...

So it was the sellers fault they were provided with (by the buyer) an address that was not an accepted delivery address! Silly seller

It was the sellers decision to pay for delivery by standard post. If that contract goes wrong for whatever reason it has nothing to do with the buyer. (NZ post should have returned the goods if they were unable to deliver them)

Matthew

1 | 2