Vendors & Buyers: What do you think a FAIR reship policy is?

There is a wild variation in vendor's reship policy, and I'd be interested to see what everyone think is fair, given circumstance. For example:

I know when I've had non-arrivals, my opinion on what the vendor should reship and their opinion is often a gulf apart.

So interested to see what we all feel would be fair for both.


Comments


[3 Points] None:

I really don't like that buyers have reputation levels, because that essentially means more orders/money spent = higher reputation.


[1 Points] cashadava:

As a buyer I think a 50% refund is reasonable, as if the package truly didn't arrive I would still receive something for the money I'd spent. No refund basically feels the same as a vendor having all listings require FE. However from a vendor stand point I can see why having a no refunds available unless it was on their end makes sense. I guess it's the difference between a vendor focusing on profit margin rather than customer service.


[1 Points] ShadowClones:

If the vendor checks tracking and it says delivered, there should be no refund and no reship. If the package got seized or lost during shipping, then the buyer and vendor should either split the loss, or the vendor can be nice and refund or reship.


[1 Points] None:

What constitutes evidence that something didn't arrive? A photo of any empty mailbox?


[1 Points] Vendor_BBMC:

I hardly ever get anybody claiming they didn't receive their order, and if they tell me, I often suspect that I forgot to send it somehow.

So I always reship, express guaranteed so it will definitely arrive. I never send high-value orders without tracking.

If somebody buys something, they should get it. Non-arrivals are very rare (at least domestically), and DNM customers are very honest, so I don't get too "Top_Gear" about it.


[1 Points] Vendor_BBMC:

When I see "reship policy" on a new vendor's profile, it makes me suspicious. It's like they're expecting shipping problems, and the market admin decides what's fair and what isn't - not the vendor. The same goes for those unenforceable fake legal disclaimers = "by buying from "us" you agree to abide by the above terms and conditions"

er...no. I agree to abide by the ruling of the marketplace admin, which is final.

At the end of the day, a customer has paid his hard-earned bitcoin for something. If he doesn't receive it he's going to feel scammed, regardless of whether it was posted in the first place or not. So vendors should make it right because bitcoin ALWAYS arrives. Even with escrow we can see that the customer is good for the money. The vendor has no proof that he's good for the drugs. That's why I always have at least one time-stamped photo of my meth on today's newspaper, or with a mobile phone showing the date.

Vendors who use a stock drug photo have to stay in escrow, and reship without question. If you want to be trusted, you have to PROVE you have drugs with new photos every week. Trust is the most valuable commodity, so the worst vendors have to be the cheapest

https://imgur.com/CaMidMh

https://imgur.com/a/IROVr or even videos

https://youtu.be/oZEZc7wcfkA?list=PLMShB_SM1W3UYodBC1gU818V1mQsofYD8

Customers need to stop being scared to sign for packages because that's like an escrow for drugs. Do that, and you can have escrow for your bitcoin.