USPS vs CGC books FIGHT! 0

[IMRavnos]

I recently bought an X-men 137 CGC 9.8 on Ebay ( for 25 under value until the value dropped on two value sites - oh boy ) and sadly, even though the seller did what looked to be an extremely good job protecting the book / holder, no one can truly protect from USPS.  Upon arrival the top of the case, nearly dead center had a 2-3" chunk of case missing, the missing piece(s) were inside the polybag. IS this something I should send in for a re-casing?  My fear is that I will need to re-submit the book and it will magically drop in grade.  If it was a 9.4 or under, no worries.  9.8 however, well we all know why that is a scary issue.

It's obvious that there has been no tampering, nothing can be removed without damage.  So what should I do?  File a claim with USPS? will they honor a claim when the "book" is not damaged but the "holder" is?

 

What a great B-Day present USPS has given me.

 

[IMRavnos]

So... Are the boards dead or just no one has any advice / opinions? just curious. 

[Spiderturtle]

On ‎6‎/‎1‎/‎2019 at 9:10 AM, IMRavnos said:

I recently bought an X-men 137 CGC 9.8 on Ebay ( for 25 under value until the value dropped on two value sites - oh boy ) and sadly, even though the seller did what looked to be an extremely good job protecting the book / holder, no one can truly protect from USPS.  Upon arrival the top of the case, nearly dead center had a 2-3" chunk of case missing, the missing piece(s) were inside the polybag. IS this something I should send in for a re-casing?  My fear is that I will need to re-submit the book and it will magically drop in grade.  If it was a 9.4 or under, no worries.  9.8 however, well we all know why that is a scary issue. 

It's obvious that there has been no tampering, nothing can be removed without damage.  So what should I do?  File a claim with USPS? will they honor a claim when the "book" is not damaged but the "holder" is?

 

What a great B-Day present USPS has given me.

 

Is that actually good packaging?  I double box the books in addition to bubble wrapping

[RockMyAmadeus]

Send it back to the seller. It's their responsibility to make sure the book arrives in the same condition it was sent. That means insuring it is on them.

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 6/1/2019 at 12:10 PM, IMRavnos said:

I recently bought an X-men 137 CGC 9.8 on Ebay ( for 25 under value until the value dropped on two value sites - oh boy ) and sadly, even though the seller did what looked to be an extremely good job protecting the book / holder, no one can truly protect from USPS.  Upon arrival the top of the case, nearly dead center had a 2-3" chunk of case missing, the missing piece(s) were inside the polybag. IS this something I should send in for a re-casing?  My fear is that I will need to re-submit the book and it will magically drop in grade.  If it was a 9.4 or under, no worries.  9.8 however, well we all know why that is a scary issue.

It's obvious that there has been no tampering, nothing can be removed without damage.  So what should I do?  File a claim with USPS? will they honor a claim when the "book" is not damaged but the "holder" is?

 

What a great B-Day present USPS has given me. 

What @RockMyAmadeus said, but if you don't go that route, CGC would not re-grade the comic in this instance since the damage to the case would not affect the condition of the comic.

[masterlogan2000]

3 hours ago, TwoPiece said:

What @RockMyAmadeus said, but if you don't go that route, CGC would not re-grade the comic in this instance since the damage to the case would not affect the condition of the comic.

You don't need to send it back to the seller necessarily, as CGC would just reholder this.  First, you should contact the seller and see if he/she will work with you to get it reholdered.  To an extent, it is the responsibility of the seller to ensure proper delivery, so if it arrived damaged, you should see if they will cover the costs of sending it back to CGC.  That should be your first step, then you can escalate it from there depending on his/her response.

[RockMyAmadeus]

8 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

 To an extent, it is the responsibility of the seller to ensure proper delivery, 

This is inaccurate. It is entirely the responsibility of the seller to "ensure proper delivery." 

That said, OP, if you *reaalllllllllllly* want that *particular* copy, then yes, you can see if you can reholder it. But this is an ultra common book and grade, and getting it reholdered isn't your job or responsibility. It would take time, effort, and resources that are the seller's responsibility...not yours. And...trying to resolve the issue by reholdering can potentially create problems down the road, especially in the (unlikely) event that the book is regraded at a lower grade. For example: what happens if the book is further damaged in transit to CGC? What if CGC damages the book? Who actually owns the book during this period? 

Send it back, get your money back, and buy another 9.8 copy. Maybe the seller has another one they can swap that one with. Or, send it back, they can get it reholdered, and sell it to you again. 

[masterlogan2000]

21 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

This is inaccurate. It is entirely the responsibility of the seller to "ensure proper delivery." 

Regardless of how much you BOLD your statement, you're wrong here.

The seller is responsible for sufficient packaging to protect the comic from damage.  Yes, "sufficient packaging" is a subjective term here, but in this case, the OP has stated that the seller did an "extremely good job protecting the book".  The title of this thread even insinuates that this issue was caused by USPS mishandling.  The seller is NOT responsible for protecting the book against mishandling.  That is what insurance is for.

 

17 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Send it back to the seller. It's their responsibility to make sure the book arrives in the same condition it was sent. That means insuring it is on them.

This is also a false statement and makes wild assumptions.  The seller is under no obligation to insure the package unless 1)  it is disclosed as part of the terms the seller has stated for shipping, or 2)  the buyer has paid for insurance on the package.  If the seller has not stated that the package will be insured, then the responsibility of insurance falls on the buyer to pay for that insurance.

You don't know the details in this particular case.  (Heck, you don't even know if insurance was purchased in this case.)  Making a blanket statement that insurance is the responsibility of the seller is incorrect, and you do this thread an injustice by spewing "advice" based on those assumptions.

[Krismusic]

56 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

This is inaccurate. It is entirely the responsibility of the seller to "ensure proper delivery." 

That said, OP, if you *reaalllllllllllly* want that *particular* copy, then yes, you can see if you can reholder it. But this is an ultra common book and grade, and getting it reholdered isn't your job or responsibility. It would take time, effort, and resources that are the seller's responsibility...not yours. And...trying to resolve the issue by reholdering can potentially create problems down the road, especially in the (unlikely) event that the book is regraded at a lower grade. For example: what happens if the book is further damaged in transit to CGC? What if CGC damages the book? Who actually owns the book during this period? 

Send it back, get your money back, and buy another 9.8 copy. Maybe the seller has another one they can swap that one with. Or, send it back, they can get it reholdered, and sell it to you again. 

this

[masterlogan2000]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

That said, OP, if you *reaalllllllllllly* want that *particular* copy, then yes, you can see if you can reholder it. But this is an ultra common book and grade, and getting it reholdered isn't your job or responsibility. It would take time, effort, and resources that are the seller's responsibility...not yours. And...trying to resolve the issue by reholdering can potentially create problems down the road, especially in the (unlikely) event that the book is regraded at a lower grade. For example: what happens if the book is further damaged in transit to CGC? What if CGC damages the book? Who actually owns the book during this period?  

Send it back, get your money back, and buy another 9.8 copy. Maybe the seller has another one they can swap that one with. Or, send it back, they can get it reholdered, and sell it to you again. 

This advice again goes on the premise that the responsibility falls on the seller.  That has not been proven, as not all the details of this case have been laid out.

Your concern about further damage to the book in transit is misplaced, as that is a concern regardless of where the book is shipped (whether it be back to the seller for a refund or back to CGC for a reholder).  You can't place weight on this concern to argue against sending it in for a reholder while discounting or completely ignoring the same exact concern when it comes to shipping it back to the seller.

There is no harm in working with the seller and opening lines of communication FIRST.  An agreement through proper communication can be worked out to cover all the scenarios you are concerned about.

[RockMyAmadeus]

6 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

Regardless of how much you BOLD your statement, you're wrong here.

Regardless of how often you challenge my statement, you're still incorrect.

eBay has a de jure "delivery contract" system. That means the responsibility lies with the seller until the buyer receives the items and can inspect them to make sure they conform with the contract (that is, what was described in the listing.)

11 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

The seller is responsible for sufficient packaging to protect the comic from damage.  Yes, "sufficient packaging" is a subjective term here, but in this case, the OP has stated that the seller did an "extremely good job protecting the book".  The title of this thread even insinuates that this issue was caused by USPS mishandling.  The seller is NOT responsible for protecting the book against mishandling.  That is what insurance is for.

Not relevant to the buyer. That's an issue for the seller and the carrier the seller contracts to resolve. The seller is, in fact, responsible for protecting the book against mishandling, in terms of who bears responsibility to the buyer. The buyer has no obligation to "take it up with the USPS" (as so many have arrogantly claimed over the decades.)

13 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

18 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Send it back to the seller. It's their responsibility to make sure the book arrives in the same condition it was sent. That means insuring it is on them.

This is also a false statement and makes wild assumptions. 

It is entirely correct, and makes no assumptions of any kind, "wild" or otherwise. Insurance is the responsibility of the party who contracts the carrier, which is the seller. Whether the seller actually has or obtains insurance is not relevant to the buyer. If the seller has not insured the item, they're going to have a difficult time making a claim against the USPS, but that's irrelevant to the buyer.

19 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

The seller is under no obligation to insure the package unless 1)  it is disclosed as part of the terms the seller has stated for shipping, or 2)  the buyer has paid for insurance on the package.

No one said the seller was obligated to insure the package. See statement directly above.

In case it is unclear, shipping insurance exists (at least insofar as eBay and most online retailers are concerned) to protect the seller...not the buyer.

21 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

If the seller has not stated that the package will be insured, then the responsibility of insurance falls on the buyer to pay for that insurance.

That is incorrect, and irrelevant to the buyer. First, there is no "responsibility of insurance." The seller is not obligated to purchase insurance (if they don't charge for it), but whether they do or not, the buyer is not responsible for paying for it if the seller has "not stated that the package will be insured."

The buyer...especially insofar as eBay is concerned...bears no responsibility for making sure an item arrives in the condition promised, insured or not.

In fact, eBay states it upfront:

"Top Takeaway

Always package your items carefully. Remember, you're responsible for ensuring the item arrives safely."

https://www.ebay.com/help/selling/posting-items/labels-packaging-tips/packing-sold-items?id=4156

If a seller wants to add the cost of insurance to the shipping and handling charge, they are free and welcome to do so...but whether they do or not, the buyer bears no responsibility for it.

35 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

You don't know the details in this particular case.  (Heck, you don't even know if insurance was purchased in this case.) 

The buyer has disclosed many of the details of this particular case. Regardless, they're not relevant to the issue of who bears responsibility for making sure an item gets to the buyer safely. As well, whether the package was insured or not is irrelevant to the buyer.

35 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

Making a blanket statement that insurance is the responsibility of the seller is incorrect, and you do this thread an injustice by spewing "advice" based on those assumptions.

Insurance is the responsibility of the seller. No assumptions have been made. You are incorrect. My apologies if pointing that out offends you, as my intent is not to offend, but to educate.

I would request that you keep the incendiary language ("wild assumptions", "spewing") out of the discussion. It's possible to discuss...and even argue...without using emotionally charged language to do so. Thanks! 

[RockMyAmadeus]

27 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

This advice again goes on the premise that the responsibility falls on the seller.  That has not been proven, as not all the details of this case have been laid out.

That's because the responsibility falls on the seller. It need not be proven (or it's already proven, depending on how you view the language of law); it is de jure the responsibility of the seller to ensure the item arrives as described.

The details of the case aren't relevant.

29 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

Your concern about further damage to the book in transit is misplaced, as that is a concern regardless of where the book is shipped (whether it be back to the seller for a refund or back to CGC for a reholder). 

Your mistake here is in assuming that the concern expressed is for further damage. It is not. I do not dispute that further damage is a concern (as it always is); however, further damage in a return isn't the responsibility of the buyer. It's a "clean" (for lack of a better time) refutation of the goods for non-conformance. But if the buyer sends it to CGC, now the title of the item is in question; has the buyer accepted the item? Who is responsible at that point? My concern, then, is not about further damage, but rather who is responsible for that further damage in the event that the book is sent to a third party (CGC.)

35 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

You can't place weight on this concern to argue against sending it in for a reholder while discounting or completely ignoring the same exact concern when it comes to shipping it back to the seller.

Sure I can. When the buyer rejects for non-conformance, title (ownership of the item) is never transferred. The item remains the seller's property throughout the entire experience, and is responsible for it. When the buyer accepts the item conditionally, and sends it to a third party, title is now a bit muddy. Who is responsible for damage in that scenario? In this case, it's not worth the hassle determining that if something should happen.

38 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

There is no harm in working with the seller and opening lines of communication FIRST.  An agreement through proper communication can be worked out to cover all the scenarios you are concerned about.

Maybe. Maybe not. People change their minds, things happen that cannot be foreseen. The issue here is the can of worms: why even bother opening it? Returning to the seller? No can of worms sitting on the shelf, waiting to be opened.

As I said before: this is an ultra common book in an ultra common grade. It is not a Suspense Comics #3 or some other extremely scarce book where a complicated agreement to get the book reholdered may be desired, rather than a simple return. That is not the case here. It is an X-Men #137 in 9.8. There are 6 other copies on eBay for purchase right now. It's not a hard choice.

[Crops068]

I have to agree with RMA on this.  It is the responsibility of the seller to get the product to the buyer in the condition it was sold as.  In this case if the buyer sends it to CGC for reholder (even if the seller is reimbursing for it), I believe the buyer would then be considered taking ownership of the item.

Over the years when I have had to deal with damaged laptops, me being the shipper, I had to deal with USPS/UPS/FedEx, not the receiver.  Me as the shipper had to opt either in or out for insurance (most times by declaring the value).  So if the seller did not cover himself and instead went with a clearly lower cost to cut corners, this will end up completely on him.  Either way, the seller is absolutely responsible for this damage and should be the one to deal with it, not the buyer.

I would send it back to the seller and have the seller deal with CGC to get it reholdered and possibly regraded (if any damage is present).

[AlphaOmega]

I normally stay out of these discussions as there is a myriad of ways to address this situation, each with a varying degree of success.  As noted by the above discussions, who is responsible for what can be a slippery slope. Let's get back to the OP questions and I will pass along my advice. After 21 years on Ebay as a seller and having shipped tens of thousands of packages, this is the what I find the most amicable approach.

1) Work with the seller.  If you take an offensive approach, you might as well start pushing a rope.

2) Ask the seller if they insured the package (probably not).  Even if they did not, Priority insurance provides $50 of coverage.  Hopefully they did not try PArcel Post or media mail.

3) Typically USPS wants the seller to make the insurance claim. The process has gotten immensely easier and can be completed online (search for insurance claim on www.usps.com).  It's as simple as providing some of the same photos as you have above along with a link to the original auction.  I usually also provide a cost of repair/replacement. In the case of basic insurance coverage, I request the full amount $50.

4) CGC will reholder the book without regrading so it will remain a 9.8.  The inner well was not breached. So a $15 reholder fee will apply along with return shipping. Total costs will be $40-$50 (see how nicely that works out?)

5) USPS will reimburse the seller the amount by check in about a week.  I typically offer the buyer two choices: a) I will give them the $50 automatically (results may vary if the seller has not made a claim before and they may wait for the check) or b) Offer to resubmit the book myself letting the buyer know that it will typically be a few months before it comes back.

In the few cases where I have had to do this, as the seller I submit the insurance request and the buyer opts for the money which I promptly send/refund.  Results may vary depending upon the cooperation of the seller hence my comment in step (1).  Thankfully the process for low value claims is streamlined and should only be a hassle for a week or so.

If you do want to use the insurance money to reholder the book, minimize the times you ship the book.   Not only does it make USPS richer by shuffling it between the buyer/seller/CGC but it can also be damaged again.

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 minutes ago, AlphaOmega said:

After 21 years on Ebay as a seller and having shipped tens of thousands of packages,

Hey, me too! 21 years this year.

You give some good advice here, but there are a couple of points that are worth addressing.

As said earlier, on eBay, it is explicitly and unambiguously spelled out (as it also is in the Uniform Commercial Code) that, in the type of business that online retailing is, the responsibility for making sure an item arrives in the condition it was described is the seller's. It does a great disservice, both to buyers and sellers, to equivocate on that. It is explicitly and patently clear in the language that eBay uses that it is the seller...never the buyer...who bears responsibility for getting the item to the buyer in the condition it was described.

It's stated here:

https://www.ebay.com/help/selling/posting-items/labels-packaging-tips/packing-sold-items?id=4156

and here:

https://www.ebay.com/help/selling/returns-refunds/return-requet-received?id=4115

and here:

https://www.ebay.com/help/selling/managing-returns-refunds/return-shipping-sellers?id=4703

and here:

https://www.ebay.com/help/buying/returns-refunds/returning-item?id=4041

I agree with you that "who bears responsibility" can be a slippery slope if buyers start sending books out to be reholdered, which is why it makes the most sense to just return it and buy another. In that case, the responsibility starts and ends with the seller, and never wavers. And while one should always work with, rather than against, a seller, if the seller offers any pushback of any kind, then that's where the buyer just returns the item and moves on, no matter how offended the seller may become.

11 minutes ago, AlphaOmega said:

4) CGC will reholder the book without regrading so it will remain a 9.8.  The inner well was not breached. So a $15 reholder fee will apply along with return shipping. Total costs will be $40-$50 (see how nicely that works out?)

While it is true that CGC *typically* won't regrade damaged holders, it's not always the case. You're mostly correct...probably in 95-99% of reholder cases, the book isn't regraded...but that's not always the case and, for the reason I stated above, it would be far easier to return it to the seller and have THEM deal with it.

Remember, the buyer asked for advice on what to do, and the buyer is concerned that it might drop in grade...which is not a concern without some measure of merit, however slight.

While getting a $40-$50 for reholdering "rebate" is a good idea, it still leaves the buyer with risk should they decide to get it reholdered somewhere down the road...even if the book wasn't actually damaged in this incident. Say it was just loosely graded, and upon resubmission, it ends up being something other than 9.8? 

The buyer should do what they're comfortable with, of course, but there is only one situation in this scenario where the buyer is completely free of risk, and that's returning the book. Every other scenario presents the buyer with a level of risk, however small. The choice between some risk and no risk is, I think, pretty clear.

[ExNihilo]

I had this happen when I bought my FF48.  Contact the seller and politely ask for compensation as you will need to send the book to CGC.  If it's a good seller, they should bear the responsibility of paying any re-holdering fees.  As the book is not impacted, you should receive the same grade without the book having to be re-graded.

[boatfund]

I'm getting old and agreeing with RMA more often than not (or maybe he is getting older and agreeing with how I think).  I do agree with all the advice he has given here.

One other point:  The OP hasn't come back with another post with even a thank you after his first two posts - time to move along, nothing to see here

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Previous pic died. Weird.

via Imgflip Meme Generator

Edited June 6, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus
Previous pic died, apparently

[masterlogan2000]

11 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

As said earlier, on eBay, it is explicitly and unambiguously spelled out (as it also is in the Uniform Commercial Code) that, in the type of business that online retailing is, the responsibility for making sure an item arrives in the condition it was described is the seller's. It does a great disservice, both to buyers and sellers, to equivocate on that. It is explicitly and patently clear in the language that eBay uses that it is the seller...never the buyer...who bears responsibility for getting the item to the buyer in the condition it was described.

It's stated here:

https://www.ebay.com/help/selling/posting-items/labels-packaging-tips/packing-sold-items?id=4156

and here:

https://www.ebay.com/help/selling/returns-refunds/return-requet-received?id=4115

and here:

https://www.ebay.com/help/selling/managing-returns-refunds/return-shipping-sellers?id=4703

and here:

https://www.ebay.com/help/buying/returns-refunds/returning-item?id=4041

You act as if eBay is the absolute authority here.  Was the transaction done on eBay?  Sure.  Does that mean that eBay's terms of service (which were written solely and strictly to protect eBay's own interests), trump all other terms, contracts, and agreements made by and between all other parties involved?  That simply cannot be the case, as eBay has no authority over the agreements made between the seller and USPS.  These terms have no legal standing outside of their own platform, and only give the buyer recourse (through the platform) an ability to return the item.  This does not give them legal authority to dictate responsibility when another party is involved (which in this case is USPS).

The buyer has a choice to return the item, as granted (NOT required), by eBay's terms.  Just because the buyer is provided this option, it does not mean that the buyer should exercise that option.

 

13 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

13 hours ago, masterlogan2000 said:

There is no harm in working with the seller and opening lines of communication FIRST.  An agreement through proper communication can be worked out to cover all the scenarios you are concerned about.

Maybe. Maybe not. People change their minds, things happen that cannot be foreseen. The issue here is the can of worms: why even bother opening it? Returning to the seller? No can of worms sitting on the shelf, waiting to be opened.

But if you must spout eBay terms and policy, why do you ignore the fact that they state the first step is to always contact the buyer first to try to resolve the problem or work it out?  Is this omission because it is counter to your argument on how this case should be handled?  Or is it because this supports MY original statement of contacting the buyer first (because you just can't help yourself when it comes to arguing with me)?  And no, jumping straight to demanding a return is not an attempt to "resolve the problem".

It's spelled out at the very top of the page here: https://resolutioncenter.ebay.com/
We always encourage our members to communicate with each other when there's a problem with a transaction. The first step is to contact the member through the Resolution Center and try to resolve the problem.

Need another example?  How about here:  https://www.ebay.com/help/buying/returns-refunds/returns-missing-items-refunds-buyers?id=4008#section2
If something's gone wrong with your order, the first step is to let the seller know there's a problem. If your item has gone missing, or if it's damaged or faulty, most sellers are happy to work with you to resolve the issue.

Still not proof enough?  Let's try another:  https://www.ebay.com/help/buying/resolving-issues-sellers/resolving-issues-sellers?id=4011
If you're having an issue with an eBay seller, try contacting them directly to resolve your problem. If you can't work things out, we're always here to step in and help.

 

 

[masterlogan2000]

13 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

I would request that you keep the incendiary language ("wild assumptions", "spewing") out of the discussion. It's possible to discuss...and even argue...without using emotionally charged language to do so. Thanks!  

13 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Regardless of how often you challenge my statement, you're still incorrect. 

In my opinion, this "emotionally charged" language is no different than calling someone out and flat out telling them that they're wrong.  Instead, let's keep the emotion intact, as I'm happy to tell you EXACTLY how I feel about your (or anyone else's) posts.  Without these words, there's a chance you misinterpret what I'm trying to convey.

I take no offence to your disagreement, nor your own choice of words.  I would request you handle this in a similar manner, otherwise that will be your own personal issue to deal with.  In other words... sorry, not sorry.