Putting the responsibility of shipping insurance on the buyer?

As the buyer, I want the insurance. Otherwise what's your time worth argueing with the seller, shipper and credit card company. Yeah, they should insure it, cost of doing business; but them's were the old days. IMO.


Oh and I almost never pay cash anymore, shifts the liability to me. Unless it's ftf.

The buyer is usually the party that decides on the option to pay for shipping insurance or not. The buyer is also responsible for paying the cost of shipping, since that cost is a variable dependent on the buyer's ship-to address. Not sure where you're getting your cost responsibility information, but it's not been my current (or historical) experience.

Guess it comes down to what's your time worth?

I would gladly pay $8 to ensure that the $600 rifle was insured to my FFL. Depending on the gun, I would pay double the insurance.

Or just overnight it, that way there's less hands on it.

Last time I over nighted a package it was probably 2015 and it was $90 then. Also it was barely a hangun sized box.

So you're surprised that you have to pay extra for something that is optional (and costs extra)?

Never bought a new vehicle, have you? {Hint: the leather package and chrome wheels are optional...and cost extra)

Pay to insure it from their warehouse to their store, where you pick it up?

That's AFU.

kwb377 said:

So you're surprised that you have to pay extra for something that is optional (and costs extra)?

Never bought a new vehicle, have you? {Hint: the leather package and chrome wheels are optional...and cost extra)

Click to expand...

Jeez.

Doesn't this kind of go back to the question of who owns the gun during shipment. My feeling is it's not mine until I (or my agent, FFL) take possession of it. If I didn't get it, I want my money back. I guess the seller thinks it is mine as soon as he relinquishes possession. It's been a long time since I've thought about this. What is current thinking?

https://www.thebalancesmb.com/retail-shipping-terms-fob-2890156

A good explanation of the concept. It all depends on the terms of the sale but I think in most cases the terms are FOB shipping point which is why the buyer pays the shipping cost.

I'm of the opinion you shouldn't be responsible for their internal shipping. How they get it to their brick and mortar store is not your responsibility.

It's like Lowes saying you bought something at our store, you should be responsible for the shipping to get it here.

I just see this as an attempt to have you cover their internal costs. When I order from other places for store pickup, I've never had an additional cost. If it disappears before you pick it up, it's on them.

The buyer will pay for the insurance, but it should be the seller/shipper guaranteeing delivery. Unfortunately, the transportation company will only talk to the shipper if the item gets "lost" during shipment!

Ask me how I know this! UPS hires criminals at its Louisville central distribution hub!

Buyer paying insurance is the standard when shipping any goods. In my personal experience it’s far easier to contest the charge with your credit card company than to actually collect on shipping insurance (ymmv).

Having been in business for many years I’ve seen cc companies side with the cardholder a majority of the time, one incident that comes to mind was a woman who initiated a charge back because her son surprised her with the same item as a gift. My response that she already had possession of the goods made no difference and she was unconditionally refunded. Never returned the goods.

Notifying my cc company that goods were delivered damaged has worked to my favor 100% of the time

Some people like to be cheap and live dangerously.

Artg56 said:

Buyer paying insurance is the standard when shipping any goods. In my personal experience it’s far easier to contest the charge with your credit card company than to actually collect on shipping insurance (ymmv).

Having been in business for many years I’ve seen cc companies side with the cardholder a majority of the time, one incident that comes to mind was a woman who initiated a charge back because her son surprised her with the same item as a gift. My response that she already had possession of the goods made no difference and she was unconditionally refunded. Never returned the goods.

Notifying my cc company that goods were delivered damaged has worked to my favor 100% of the time

Click to expand...

I agree. I've never contested a CC charge unless I was in the right and the seller was in the wrong (I don't try to make someone else pay for my mistakes), but when I've done so, especially with American Express, the burden of proof shifts to the seller. I expect there are a lot of people who take advantage of this and stiff the seller in one way or another, unfortunately.

As someone who has sold a number of items online, I have a perspective that appears to differ from many sellers. I think the idea of making the buyer responsible for damages or issues incurred while shipping something, regardless the item, is bad business. In my view, it is the responsibility of the seller to make sure that the item is adequately packaged. Moreover, it is up to the seller to use reliable shipping providers that don’t lose/damage items in transit.

As a seller, I take the view that when someone buys an item that I have for sale, there is an expectation that I will make sure that the item arrives at the delivery address and in the advertised condition.

I have had a few instances in which I sold something and there were issues with shipping. I sold a few magazines to a gentleman. The magazines did not arrive after about two weeks. He contacted me about it. I immediately refunded his money since USPS losing the package is not his fault. Fortunately, after I contacted USPS, the package was located, delivered, and the gentleman paid me. The second case involved some ammo cans that I sold. The package was damaged in transit and of the 12 cans, the buyer only received 11. He notified me. I refunded him 1/12 of his original payment and he was happy.

I recognize that the offering of shipping insurance is not necessarily done because a seller is a malignant actor or does not want to make things right. However, I do think that it suggests that the seller views his/her responsibility for an item as ending once a courier retrieves it instead of ending upon receipt by the customer.

@giggitygiggity makes some good points from a seller's viewpoint above, and I think that in the case of the seller being protected from loss due to shipping damage, then the seller should be paying for the insurance. It's customary with insurance that whoever pays for it gets to decide who gets the payout from a claim. If the seller automatically pays then it need not be an add-on "option" presented to the buyer for their choice.

Insurance coverage on a shipment is to protect the shipper/seller, not the recipient/buyer.

A buyer deserves to get the item in the condition as described. If it arrives damaged that's not on him, but the seller who packaged the item or the carrier that transported the item.
Thats been the standard policy on ebay for years. (and quite a few gun forums as well)

Sellers (like Bud's) who say "if you want insurance ya gotta pay extra!" are playing the odds that the package will not be lost or stolen. If you are so cheap that you wanted to avoid the 3% credit card fee thats the gamble you are taking. Using a credit card means a chargeback if the item never arrives or arrives damaged.

wiscoaster said:

..... It's customary with insurance that whoever pays for it gets to decide who gets the payout from a claim. ..

Click to expand...

Not at all true.
UPS/FedEx/USPS all allow either recipient or sender to file a claim for loss or damage. They don't care who paid for the insurance, only that it was insured and packaged according to that carriers tariff.

dogtown tom said:

Not at all true....

Click to expand...

In the quote you referenced I'm talking about insurance in general, not shipping insurance in particular, and while what you said about that one specific case is correct, at one point in my life I was an insurance agent, so I think I'm correct about the general case, and if you're just trying to start another argument about that, you don't know what you're talking about, and I'm not biting.

Elkins45 said:

This is sort of a legal question, but not about gun laws. I’ve bought a number of guns from Bud’s Gun Shop online over the years. Since I’m somewhat close to their retail store I’ve always had them shipped there because there’s no transfer fee.

I was recently looking at another gun and during the checkout process I discovered that if you want the gun insured in shipment from the warehouse to the store they now charge you extra. In the case of a $600 long gun it was about $8, so not a huge amount, but I do find it irksome. My understanding has always been that it’s the responsibility of the seller/shipper to bear responsibility for the cost of the shipment until it is in the buyer’s hands. So they can hope you pay the insurance fee but if you don’t it’s still their problem if the gun is lost in transit.

Or is this one of those things where what I think and actuality are different? In practicality they probably have you over a barrel because the option to pay cash/check at pickup is no longer available. Now they want you to either mail funds or pay a 3% up charge for credit, so using an easily reversible payment method will cost you more. The discount option means they already have your money and you have to beg to get it back if something goes wrong.

Not a big deal, but it is interesting.

Click to expand...

sincerest apologies-maybe i missed it but at what point did you actually pay for the rifle? Did you prepay before it left the warehouse? Or did you pay when it showed up at the store?

that distinction determines whether i would be interested in the insurance. If prepaid, hell yeah. That’s now my property and i want certainty of outcome that i will be made whole if it turns up damaged.

if you waited to pay for it until it got to the store, then care and custody is to their account. You are not obliged in any way.