Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick  | | Posted: | Apr 29, 2024 06:03 | | Subject: | Re: We should be able to get rid of some users | | Viewed: | 79 times | | Topic: | Help | |
| For a seller, the order is fulfilled when the buyer receives ALL items ordered.
It's the seller his obligation to make sure the buyer receives the complete
order.
If the seller fails to do so, a simple refund of the missing items is not sufficient
as the buyer needs to put time in searching a new store to purchase from AND
to pay shipping costs again.
The seller can offer:
A) The buyer returns the full order, with a full refund (including original shipping
costs AND including the return shipping costs, since it was a seller's problem).
Seems expensive for the seller, but it's the seller's fault to begin
with.
B) Refund missing items and reasonable part of the original shipping costs. Or
completely. So the buyer isn't forced to pay shipping costs at another store
from his own pocket.
C) Make sure the buyer receives the items. If you (the seller) doens't have
it in stock, you can place the order yourself at another store, and re-ship (or
just choose a dropshipping method).
I know all options will eat (part of) your profit, but it was your error to begin
with. The buyer can't be held accountable for the mistakes a seller made.
So for a seller you can only sigh, take the cost and learn to get better and
order fulfilling to spot missing items.
The solution you offered to simply refund the actual costs of the missing items,
without even reaching out to the buyer first to discuss options, is not a good
one. I usually go for option C) because I find it my obligation as a seller to
make sure I fully fulfill the order without extra work for my customer. All efforts
and costs to rectify a problem, should come from the seller.
I understand BrickLink used to have more of a "kindred spirits" without
a true enforced "buyer-seller relationship with commercial and legal obligations".
But things have evolved over time, as more and more people found their way to
BrickLink. As a result, the commercial and legal obligations become more and
more important, so it's important for sellers to be aware of these obligations
and act correctly to follow these obligations.
Lastly, I don't think it really professional to post this issue here in the
thread and mention the related user. It might even be considered a privacy violation
to do so? I think it is. But in any case, as a seller, stay professional. This
isn't really a professional action.
You might continue by stoplisting my account as well based on the fact you will
probably not like this reply. It's just how I think about this situation
and give you some other point of view you might consider.
|
 |
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Apr 24, 2024 07:35 | | Subject: | Re: What would you do? | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
| In Problem Order, peregrinator writes:
| | In Problem Order, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | I sold and shipped an old classic Space set. The set was in good condition when
shipped. The buyer reports three problems:
1. One part is bent (hinge plate).
2. One plate 4 x 6 is broken (really: in two halfs!)
3. The one minifig in the set (classic space figure) has a cracked arm.
He asks to ship it back and get his money back.
I understand his frustration: a small'ish set with three defects is not good.
But I just didn't see the problems when shipping. Still my fault obviously,
but definitely not by intent.
I would rather suggest to send replacement parts:
1. Send a replacement part
2. Send a replacement part
3. Send a replacement arm (not the whole minifig)
Would you consider this a good solution?
If the buyer would persist in sending the set back, how would you handle it?
Thank you for your feedback.
|
For #3 I would suggest sending a replacement torso, if you have one - I don't
think the buyer should have to remove the cracked arm and put a new arm in its
place.
|
I understand. However, it's a classic space torso with full gold moon. So
replacements for this part are rare.
| | But as far as shipping the whole thing back for a full refund - isn't that
EU law? I don't see that you have a choice here.
|
Correct, and I accept returns. But as I offer an alternative solution, return
shipping costs would be on the account of the buyer. That's at least how
I see it. Would you agree in this situation?
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Apr 24, 2024 07:05 | | Subject: | Re: What would you do? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
| Note: it's a set from 1982. Doesn't excuse the broken parts, but could
maybe shed some context (like on the crack in the minifig's arm).
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Apr 24, 2024 07:02 | | Subject: | What would you do? | | Viewed: | 183 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
| I sold and shipped an old classic Space set. The set was in good condition when
shipped. The buyer reports three problems:
1. One part is bent (hinge plate).
2. One plate 4 x 6 is broken (really: in two halfs!)
3. The one minifig in the set (classic space figure) has a cracked arm.
He asks to ship it back and get his money back.
I understand his frustration: a small'ish set with three defects is not good.
But I just didn't see the problems when shipping. Still my fault obviously,
but definitely not by intent.
I would rather suggest to send replacement parts:
1. Send a replacement part
2. Send a replacement part
3. Send a replacement arm (not the whole minifig)
Would you consider this a good solution?
If the buyer would persist in sending the set back, how would you handle it?
Thank you for your feedback.
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Mar 24, 2024 07:51 | | Subject: | Re: The order came wrong | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
| I am usually very careful before "taking sides". And even more before
"shaming" a person (buyer or seller) or store.
It's obvious sending the wrong part must be corrected by the seller. That's
without a doubt.
But we don't know the full story. Elements that are open to be able to fully
assess the situation (which is not up to us, to be honest) could be:
- OP mentions 3 options offered by the seller. Which are they? Maybe they are
actually quite reasonable.
- OP mentions "arrogant manner". This could be, but it's a subjective
interpretation. It doesn't make it so per definition. Maybe the seller doesn't
speak English as primary language. I don't either. This can result in some
unintended interpretation / lost in translation issues.
- Was the order only that minifig, or is the minifig part of a bigger order?
If so, what is the minifig's value in % to the total order?
I don't want the answer to these questions, as it's basically something
between buyer and seller to hopefully come to an agreement. But I'm just
saying there are usually multiple angles to look at a certain situation.
Personally, if I was the seller in such case, I would refund the part and shipping
costs (+ import taxes, if they can be proven that they were paid). I did refunds
with loss (for me) in the past, because I judged it was my fault and the buyer
should be compensated without any loss. Any wrongfully sent item, they could
keep. Loss for me. "Make mistakes, get better." lesson for me as well!
But as a seller, I can not get into the demand of a buyer saying "it's
my obligation to get him/her the part that was ordered without any other option".
That would involve me basically going into dropshipping. Or a whole fuzz with
me ordering, receiving, reviewing, repackaging, reshipping, ... I think that
goes beyond a reasonable scope for a seller.
Do take note I have gone through this trouble as a seller, but that was in the
situation a used set (sold as complete) missed a part or two. I could've
chosen to refund in full, or to make sure the set got completed at the buyer.
I did the latter, because a refund in full was far more expensive as me completing
the set.
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2024 10:04 | | Subject: | 5135cx1 vs 5135c01 | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
| When looking at 5135cx1 vs 5135c01, the description mentions different colors
for the wheels.
5135cx1 = Pearl Light Gray (PLG)
5135c01 = Light Bluish Gray (LBG)
The image in the catalog seems to show another difference: the button on the
top.
5135cx1 = transparant yellow button
5135c01 = solid green button
In a bulk lot, I found three of these locomotives, all in yellow.
The first is clearly 5135cx1, as the wheels are clearly Pearl Light Gray.
The button on top is trans yellow.
The second has wheels in Light Bluish Gray (100% sure, it's distinctive
when comparing with the first one) and has the trans yellow button.
The third has wheels in Light Bluish Gray (again easy to see when comparing
with the first one) and has the solid green button.
The problems here are:
1. It's unclear wether the button plays a differrence in catalog identification.
2. The item 5135c01 doesn't seem to exist in yellow. At least not in the
catalog, as there is no set reference that has this part in yellow.
I don't know how to list them correctly.
Picture of the second and third model below.
Who can help with some thoughts on this?
|
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Jan 28, 2024 11:29 | | Subject: | Re: 6108 versus 14707: I don't see it ... | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
| In Catalog Identification, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | I am looking at the comparative image that can be found at item 18838 (which
is a variant of 6108 and 14707). I don't see the difference between 14707
and 6108, on that picture.
Who can help me?
|
It's raised at the ends of the arch. Look at the comparison image for
|
I see, thanks.
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Jan 28, 2024 11:25 | | Subject: | 6108 versus 14707: I don't see it ... | | Viewed: | 82 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
| I am looking at the comparative image that can be found at item 18838 (which
is a variant of 6108 and 14707). I don't see the difference between 14707
and 6108, on that picture.
Who can help me?
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2024 07:31 | | Subject: | Re: 973pb0297c01 but eagle facing opposite side? | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
| In Catalog Identification, SezaR writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | Looking at , the beak of the eagle is pointing to the right (when
looking at the torso). Same for the similar torso's and .
I have found the same torso, but the beak is pointing left.
Is this variation common, is this a rare misprint, or might this be another torso?
|
see
https://img.bricklink.com/ItemImage/EXTN/14292.png
|
Thanks!
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2024 07:31 | | Subject: | Re: 973pb0297c01 but eagle facing opposite side? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
| In Catalog Identification, BestBuyBricks writes:
| | The 2nd picture shows your torso as a known variant.
In Catalog Identification, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | Correction: eagle should be falcon, of course.
|
|
Thanks!
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2024 07:12 | | Subject: | Re: 973pb0297c01 but eagle facing opposite side? | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
| | Correction: eagle should be falcon, of course. |
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2024 07:11 | | Subject: | 973pb0297c01 but eagle facing opposite side? | | Viewed: | 116 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
| Looking at , the beak of the eagle is pointing to the right (when
looking at the torso). Same for the similar torso's and .
I have found the same torso, but the beak is pointing left.
Is this variation common, is this a rare misprint, or might this be another torso?
|
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Dec 29, 2023 12:57 | | Subject: | Re: Improve "tracking no" field on the order | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, jennnifer writes:
| | In Suggestions, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | I get regular questions from customers where the tracking information is. I did
supply it on the order, but clearly it's not visible enough.
Secondly, the "tracking no" is not sufficient. Better would be "tracking
link", so the seller can put the whole link in it, after which BrickLink
could show it on the order list and detail, for example with a clickable "tracking
icon", like a globe or small delivery truck.
|
You can easily add the tracking number (with a macro) to the Drive Thru! message.
You can also manually add the link there as well.
~Jen
|
You are correct there are ways to sweeten the deal (if that's the correct
expression). But my suggestion was more in the context something like a tracking
link shouldn't be that hard to enter (using url shorteners and all).
And part of the suggestion, is to display it to the buyer as a clickable link
on the order detail and overview page. So not only in a message that will most
likely not be read. People tend to go look for the tracking information once
the date they expected the package has passed.
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Dec 29, 2023 12:55 | | Subject: | Re: Improve "tracking no" field on the order | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, wildchicken13 writes:
| | In Suggestions, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | I get regular questions from customers where the tracking information is. I did
supply it on the order, but clearly it's not visible enough.
Secondly, the "tracking no" is not sufficient. Better would be "tracking
link", so the seller can put the whole link in it, after which BrickLink
could show it on the order list and detail, for example with a clickable "tracking
icon", like a globe or small delivery truck.
|
You can put anything you want in the tracking number field, including links.
However, there's a 50 character limit, so you may have to use a URL shortener
like Bitly. Also, the link is not clickable on the order details page, so the
buyer will have to manually highlight and copy it.
|
You are correct. However, something like a tracking link shouldn't be that
hard to enter (using url shorteners and all).
And part of the suggestion, is to display it to the buyer as a clickable link
on the order detail and overview page.
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Dec 29, 2023 12:09 | | Subject: | Improve "tracking no" field on the order | | Viewed: | 98 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
| I get regular questions from customers where the tracking information is. I did
supply it on the order, but clearly it's not visible enough.
Secondly, the "tracking no" is not sufficient. Better would be "tracking
link", so the seller can put the whole link in it, after which BrickLink
could show it on the order list and detail, for example with a clickable "tracking
icon", like a globe or small delivery truck.
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Dec 19, 2023 15:25 | | Subject: | Re: Some customers .... | | Viewed: | 71 times | | Topic: | Off Topic | |
| In Off Topic, 1001bricks writes:
| | | | Buyer replies: "Money is a bit tight at the moment."
Ofcourse I will cancel with a full refund, but pretty odd situation...
|
Instead of posting, you should be happy 11€ not being a problem to you.
|
Wow. Didn't see such a passive aggressive reaction coming...
(But on topic: why pay 11 euro and ask for a refund 40 minutes later? I get it
you don't want to pay or can't pay 11 euro. Nothing to judge there. But
actually paying and asking for a full refund is just strange.)
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Dec 19, 2023 15:06 | | Subject: | Some customers .... | | Viewed: | 251 times | | Topic: | Off Topic | |
| Person buys for 8.09 euro in parts and 3.75 euro for shipping. Total amount of
11.84 euro paid with PayPal (Onsite). Order placed at 19:42.
Buyer messages me 40 minutes later "if it would be possible to cancel the
order and give a full refund."
I ask: "Can I ask for the reason?"
Buyer replies: "Money is a bit tight at the moment."
Ofcourse I will cancel with a full refund, but pretty odd situation...
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Dec 10, 2023 11:58 | | Subject: | Re: Disallow adding fees to the order | | Viewed: | 68 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| | | You are a seller also, so I checked how you approach this in your shop.
You are also charging packing, handling and paypal fees but you include these
in your shipping cost. If IC could be properly setup these additional charges
would also be shown before checkout.
|
You are missing my point: it's not a technical thing. You are correct I use
a single "shipping and handling fee", which is easy for the buyer and
very transparant.
Other stores, often technically setup correctly, charge "1 euro per lot +
4.35% when PayPal fee + 3 euro for general packaging", which is the opposite
from transparancy.
| | In your terms you mention a 2% discount when paying with IBAN, but this does
not seem to function when I tested it on an €80 set.
|
You have a correct point, thanks for testing! 
BrickLink recently got my shipping methods removed, and I had to recreate them.
I forgot to configure that part, so I now want ahead and deleted that line in
the general T&C. Thanks for pointing that out!
| | You offer several shipment options to Netherlands. If I wanted to buy 1x 4073
the shipping options according to your terms are
small letter untracked €2,95
large letter untracked €6,95
large letter tracked €8,25
parcel to parcelshop tracked €7,25
But when I go to the order process the only shipping option available is large
letter tracked for €10,25. which is €2 above your advertised price, and €7,30
more than the cheapest option.
|
Again you found some bad configuration after I had to recreate my shipping methods.
I will go ahead and fix it later today! Once again: thank you for pointing that
out!
| | Maybe you could fix your own shop before complaining about others?
|
You have a valid point there were/are some errors in my configuration. But that's
what they are: errors. It has nothing to do with my initial suggestion (which
is not a complaint by the way).
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Dec 10, 2023 09:24 | | Subject: | Disallow adding fees to the order | | Viewed: | 258 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
| As a buyer, it's very annoying having to fill baskets at several stores where
I of course keep track of prices, only to find out later the seller(s) charge
PayPal fees, packing fees, processing fees, ... It makes comparing between shops
as good as impossible.
At least the min. buy setting is announced up front (and I usually filter out
stores with a high min. buy). But these extra "fees" for whatever reason,
is done at the very last step of checkout or even only mentioned in the T&C.
I'm not advocating sellers should not be able to cover their costs, including
even packing costs, but these should be included in their "item prices"
on the one hand (PayPal % fee) and "shipping and handling costs" on the
other hand (packaging material, order processing fees, ...).
Sellers that really don't want to adjust prices or pay they PayPal fee, can
remove PayPal as valid payment method.
When instant checkout would be required for all stores (and I don't see why
not, seems like a logical evolution), the full cost of an order including all
fees the seller feels he should charge, is transparant to the buyer while he
is filling baskets. It's also more fair to sellers, as they are compared
with each other on equal grounds.
|
|
| Author: | Gaston.La.Brick | | Posted: | Dec 10, 2023 09:14 | | Subject: | Re: Emergency Brake | | Viewed: | 63 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| I see the potential (so I voted yes).
However, I think there are better, more standardized improvements on the security
topic to prevent having accounts hacked.
Example: 2 factor authentication, where your password alone is not sufficient,
but you need to duplicate a code sent to your mobile phone (or via an authenticator
app).
It will drastically avoid your account being hacked in the first place, so the
need for an emergency brake would be less needed.
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
