From: Rad on
<http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/FORD-FOCUS-1998-2004-FRONT-WINDOW-REGULATOR-5-DOOR-NEW_W0QQitemZ120319172037QQcmdZViewItem?rvr_id=&rvr_id=&cguid=0405d4e212a0a0aad33135a1fe82a39b>

I just had a look at the returns policy on the above item:

RETURNS MUST BE MADE WITH IN 7 DAYS OR RECIPT, ALL ITEMS MUST BE CHECKED
BEFORE SIGNED FOR, IF COURIES WILL NOT WAIT PAPER WORK MUST BE SIGNED AS
DAMAGED OR NO CLAIM CAN BE MADE

The item is an electrical component for an electric window. Unless you
have specialist equipment to hand the only way to correctly check if it
works is to wire it into the car's circuitry which first requires
stripping the door down which isn't a quick job by any means.

I don't think many couriers will hang around whilst this is done!

And it seems a bit unethical and even fraudulent to write 'damaged' on
something that hasn't been checked. It looks like the seller wants to be
able to claim from the courier for manufacturing faults.

From: MC on
Rad wrote:

>
<http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/FORD-FOCUS-1998-2004-FRONT-WINDOW-REGULATOR-5-DOOR-NEW_W0QQitemZ120319172037QQcmdZViewItem?rvr_id=&rvr_id=&cguid=0405d4e212a0a0aad33135a1fe82a39b>
>
> I just had a look at the returns policy on the above item:
>
> RETURNS MUST BE MADE WITH IN 7 DAYS OR RECIPT, ALL ITEMS MUST BE
> CHECKED BEFORE SIGNED FOR, IF COURIES WILL NOT WAIT PAPER WORK MUST
> BE SIGNED AS DAMAGED OR NO CLAIM CAN BE MADE
>
> The item is an electrical component for an electric window. Unless
> you have specialist equipment to hand the only way to correctly check
> if it works is to wire it into the car's circuitry which first
> requires stripping the door down which isn't a quick job by any
> means.
>
> I don't think many couriers will hang around whilst this is done!
>
> And it seems a bit unethical and even fraudulent to write 'damaged'
> on something that hasn't been checked. It looks like the seller wants
> to be able to claim from the courier for manufacturing faults.

"Damaged" has a different meaning to "Faulty"

MC
From: Peter Crosland on
"Rad" <rad(a)rad.rad> wrote in message news:tzB2o.245153$sD7.1195(a)hurricane...
> <http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/FORD-FOCUS-1998-2004-FRONT-WINDOW-REGULATOR-5-DOOR-NEW_W0QQitemZ120319172037QQcmdZViewItem?rvr_id=&rvr_id=&cguid=0405d4e212a0a0aad33135a1fe82a39b>
>
> I just had a look at the returns policy on the above item:
>
> RETURNS MUST BE MADE WITH IN 7 DAYS OR RECIPT, ALL ITEMS MUST BE CHECKED
> BEFORE SIGNED FOR, IF COURIES WILL NOT WAIT PAPER WORK MUST BE SIGNED AS
> DAMAGED OR NO CLAIM CAN BE MADE
>
> The item is an electrical component for an electric window. Unless you
> have specialist equipment to hand the only way to correctly check if it
> works is to wire it into the car's circuitry which first requires
> stripping the door down which isn't a quick job by any means.
>
> I don't think many couriers will hang around whilst this is done!
>
> And it seems a bit unethical and even fraudulent to write 'damaged' on
> something that hasn't been checked. It looks like the seller wants to be
> able to claim from the courier for manufacturing

It makes no difference what "conditions"the seller puts in their listing.
The law remains the same. A business seller is legally responsible for the
goods until they are safely delivered to the retail customer. Personally I
would not buy from a seller who purports to impose such terms.

Peter Crosland


From: Theo Markettos on
Rad <rad(a)rad.rad> wrote:
> And it seems a bit unethical and even fraudulent to write 'damaged' on
> something that hasn't been checked. It looks like the seller wants to be
> able to claim from the courier for manufacturing faults.

You can marked it 'unchecked', which I think is the same intention. Though
I'm unsure of the legal validity of signing:

Received parcel in good condition [that's usually preprinted]
UNCHECKED
J. SMITH


Theo
From: Niel Humphreys on
"Peter Crosland" <g6jns(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:LLqdnUNqt9ylvtbRnZ2dnUVZ8lSdnZ2d(a)brightview.co.uk...
> "Rad" <rad(a)rad.rad> wrote in message
> news:tzB2o.245153$sD7.1195(a)hurricane...
>> <http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/FORD-FOCUS-1998-2004-FRONT-WINDOW-REGULATOR-5-DOOR-NEW_W0QQitemZ120319172037QQcmdZViewItem?rvr_id=&rvr_id=&cguid=0405d4e212a0a0aad33135a1fe82a39b>
>>
>> I just had a look at the returns policy on the above item:
>>
>> RETURNS MUST BE MADE WITH IN 7 DAYS OR RECIPT, ALL ITEMS MUST BE CHECKED
>> BEFORE SIGNED FOR, IF COURIES WILL NOT WAIT PAPER WORK MUST BE SIGNED AS
>> DAMAGED OR NO CLAIM CAN BE MADE
>>
>> The item is an electrical component for an electric window. Unless you
>> have specialist equipment to hand the only way to correctly check if it
>> works is to wire it into the car's circuitry which first requires
>> stripping the door down which isn't a quick job by any means.
>>
>> I don't think many couriers will hang around whilst this is done!
>>
>> And it seems a bit unethical and even fraudulent to write 'damaged' on
>> something that hasn't been checked. It looks like the seller wants to be
>> able to claim from the courier for manufacturing
>
> It makes no difference what "conditions"the seller puts in their listing.
> The law remains the same. A business seller is legally responsible for the
> goods until they are safely delivered to the retail customer. Personally I
> would not buy from a seller who purports to impose such terms.


Of course if sellers packed their gear properly then they would not feel the
need to have these kinds of terms. I pack everything I sell carefully and
with plenty of packing material. Send about 10-15 boxes a day these days and
have not had a damage in transit for at least 2 years - that, to me, tells
its own story.

It's easy to blame couriers but a lot of the time damage in transit is down
to the seller skimping on packing to save a few pence IMHO.