Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | ToriHada  | | Posted: | Mar 26, 2022 07:07 | | Subject: | Re: Lost package fault | | Viewed: | 83 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | In Shipping, C0lsanders_ writes:
| | I have a package I sent earlier this month, but hasn't arrived (domestic
US). The customer has not brought it up yet, but I am wondering about issuing
a full refund.
My question is why would I be responsible for a lost item? I read on here all
the time that the seller is responsible, but why? I contracted with a company
to deliver an item from A to B, and paid them in full. If they fail in their
paid job, why on Earth would I be responsible (fiscally or otherwise)? If I order
a pizza and pay them in advance, but they lose it, drop it, or whatever, who
is responsible...?
I'm looking for logic and/or legal reasons, NOT "it's the right thing"
reasonings.
Thanks,
Miles (C0lsanders_)
|
The logical reason is that you have a contract with a buyer to fulfill their
order. If they don't get the item they ordered, you have not fulfilled the
contract.
|
This is the normal situation. Your agreement as a seller is to deliver the goods
to the buyer. If you hire someone else to actually deliver the goods to the
buyer, you are still legally responsible even if the subcontractor you hired
fails to perform what you paid them to do.
However, a seller CAN make a different agreement with the buyer. It just needs
to be clear in their terms. Thus, for example, a seller's terms can clearly
state that for uninsured orders they agree to deliver only to the shipper (not
to the buyer) and that their performance of the contract is complete at that
point. From that point on, the buyer is legally deemed to have received the
package and is responsible for any loss thereafter. In other words, a seller's
terms can legally shift the agency created with the shipper. Instead of the
normal situation where the shipper (e.g. USPS) is the agent of the seller, shop
terms can instead make the shipper the agent of the buyer.
Businesses very frequently contract in this matter using FOB terms, especially
in B2B transactions. "FOB destination" means the seller is responsible for the
package reaching its destination (usually the buyer's location). "FOB origin"
means the buyer is responsible for the package once it leaves the seller's
place of business. "FOB shipper" means the seller is responsible only for delivering
the package to the agreed upon shipper.
Some states and countries may have laws limiting FOB terms to consumers or
individual end-user buyers. But absent such laws, sellers are free to include
whatever FOB terms they like.
Foster
|
 |
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Mar 25, 2022 23:52 | | Subject: | Re: Lost package fault | | Viewed: | 63 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, Yo_Yo_Flamingo writes:
| | | | Some may argue that PayPal's terms trump any contrary terms in your shop.
But PayPal's selling terms only apply to you and PayPal - not to your buyer.
|
A very nice thought... However, when a buyer pays with Paypal, paypal gains all
leverage over you. They don't want their service to be seen as impotent,
so they are aggressive in defending buyer's money (even too far, sometimes).
|
You are absolutely correct. Regardless of your shop terms, PayPal can still
refund the buyer. But by doing so PayPal is NOT saying the buyer does not have
any legal obligation to pay for the order. They are only saying that PayPal
cannot be used to pay for that order. A PayPal chargeback does not void the
sales contract or extinguish the buyer's obligation to honor the seller's
terms. Depending on your store terms and the applicable law, the buyer may still
be legally obligated to pay for the order (via some means other than PayPal).
Of course, from a practical and economic point of view, no one is going to pursue
legal remedies over a $50 order. But for say a large $5,000+ order between sellers,
legal options ARE still available.
Foster
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Mar 25, 2022 22:58 | | Subject: | Re: Lost package fault | | Viewed: | 86 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, C0lsanders_ writes:
| | I have a package I sent earlier this month, but hasn't arrived (domestic
US). The customer has not brought it up yet, but I am wondering about issuing
a full refund.
My question is why would I be responsible for a lost item? I read on here all
the time that the seller is responsible, but why? I contracted with a company
to deliver an item from A to B, and paid them in full. If they fail in their
paid job, why on Earth would I be responsible (fiscally or otherwise)? If I order
a pizza and pay them in advance, but they lose it, drop it, or whatever, who
is responsible...?
I'm looking for logic and/or legal reasons, NOT "it's the right thing"
reasonings.
Thanks,
Miles (C0lsanders_)
|
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to bring back the old me by addressing
an issue that has come up countless times since BrickLink's inception. As
a retired attorney who specialized in contract law, I answered this question
by using the following terms in my shop when I was a seller here:
"If you choose not to insure your package so that you can reduce shipping costs,
you agree to accept the small risk of loss or damage during transit and to release
us from any claims of non-receipt if we provide you proof of shipping. We
ship all uninsured orders FOB (or FCA) Shipping Point. This means once we
take your uninsured package to the post office, it belongs to you, ownership
and risk of loss pass to you at that point, and you are thereafter responsible
for any loss or damage during transit not covered by insurance. We give you this
CHOICE as a courtesy and option for YOU to save shipping costs. If you cannot
accept these terms or the small risk of loss in return for cheaper shipping,
please let us know and we will gladly remain responsible for delivering the package
into your hands. All we ask is that you then pay our actual costs for obtaining
insured trackable shipping."
Some may argue that PayPal's terms trump any contrary terms in your shop.
But PayPal's selling terms only apply to you and PayPal - not to your buyer.
Your buyer makes a subsequent intervening agreement with YOU when they place
an order with YOU. So YOUR terms control between you and your buyer. You will,
of course, still have to honor your agreement with PayPal. However, if a buyer
accepts your terms but then successfully seeks a chargeback from PayPal, the
buyer is still bound by your terms and must still pay for the order. PayPal
just won't allow itself to be the means of payment. You can still seek payment
from the buyer via other means. But practically speaking, there really isn't
much you can do that is economically worthwhile. Nonetheless, if the order is
large enough, you CAN file suit for breach of contract in small claims court
(depending on your state).
The legal key to all this is that the buyer agreed to accept delivery not to
his home, but to a third party shipping agent (e.g. the Post Office) and knowingly
agreed to assume all risk of loss after that point. Businesses do this all the
time.
This is what you CAN do. What you SHOULD do can be very different, depending
on the specific circumstances of each case.
In my long career as an attorney, clients almost always made one of two mistakes.
Either they believed the law did not apply to them when it, in fact, did. Or
they believed the law applied to them when it did not. In my experience, this
latter mistake was very often more costly for businesses because it convinced
them not to pursue opportunities that could have been very lucrative for them.
A lawyer's job is not just to advise a business what they can or cannot
do. But to also advise them how to legally do something the law seemingly says
they cannot do.
Foster
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Mar 25, 2022 16:52 | | Subject: | Re: Brief Return to BL | | Viewed: | 71 times | | Topic: | Announce | |
|
| In Announce, Nubs_Select writes:
| | You will need to add either PayPal onsite or stripe in order to sell to most
of USA and Europe now so you might want to add that so you can sell your item.
It's required so bricklink can collect tax
|
Thanks! I will do so this weekend. I have a hot date planned for this evening.
Does BrickLink ADD the sales tax to the order amount, or is sales tax DEDUCTED
from the order amount?
For you old timers out there, can we still sell via the old-fashioned way of
invoicing later after the order is placed and packed? Of course, all terms and
prices will be agreed upon with the buyer in advance.
Foster
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Mar 25, 2022 16:46 | | Subject: | NEED BULK? | | Viewed: | 163 times | | Topic: | Sales | |
|
| Do you need to bulk up your BrickLink store with all new parts? I am a trusted
retired seller with excellent high feedback offering my entire inventory for
sale in one bulk lot consisting of 33,902 items in 132 lots in 21 categories.
All parts are in pristine NEW condition and 99% of them have been sorted, pre-counted
and pre-bagged for easy resale. The total original list price for everything
is $1,419, which was already well below the total Price Guide Average of $2,143.
I am asking only $700 for everything, plus shipping (not to exceed $75) and
any applicable sales tax. US buyers only please, as international shipping for
this large lot will be disgustingly obscene. Any sale will be done only on BrickLink.
Below are some images. The new sealed set is included, as is the plastic organizer.
I can send you more images and information via the BL message feature. You
can also see a list of all parts and quantities by visiting my BrickLink store
and using the unlock password BULKSALE.
Thank you for looking. And have a wonderful weekend!
Foster
|
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Mar 25, 2022 16:27 | | Subject: | Brief Return to BL | | Viewed: | 284 times | | Topic: | Announce | |
|
| Hello everyone. Long time no see. I hope you are all doing well.
After a several year hiatus, I am making a brief return to BrickLink to sell
my bulk inventory. I will post a separate sales announcement under the appropriate
topic.
These are troubled times. But one good thing that resulted was getting closer
with my grandson and sharing the joy of LEGO. Over the past two years, I have
splurged and spoiled him with LEGO. And I have also amassed a quantity of new
bulk LEGO he does not need. So I will be listing it for sale in my shop as a
single bulk lot for very close to my cost. Any modest profit will go to my grandson
to reward him for counting and bagging this lot with me and to teach him the
value of money, work and business.
There seem to be a lot of changes to BrickLink and selling here since my time
as a seller several years ago. Since I only wish to sell this one bulk lot,
please pardon me if I don't fully update all my terms (e.g. sales tax, shipping,
etc.). They will be discussed and agreed upon with the buyer of this bulk lot.
Of course, any sale will take place on BrickLink.
What news have you? Are there any major changes I should know about? Has BrickLink
lost any big "old time" sellers? Is John still entertaining you with his wit
and humor?
Foster
P.S. Any big sellers in the Tampa Bay Area?
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Feb 16, 2019 19:03 | | Subject: | Re: We need a modern way to part out sets. | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, HallBricks writes:
...
| | There are of course lots of different features that could be implemented to make
the Part Out tool even more powerful, like more advanced ways to set up automatic
prices, like 10% below average etc.
|
When I was selling here I was very strongly opposed to the idea of automating
pricing to undercut the Price Guide Average. My thinking then was that nothing
would increase downward pressure on prices or accelerate the "race to the bottom"
some sellers here engage in more than giving them a way to automatically, easily,
quickly and repeatedly price thousands and thousands of lots BELOW the Price
Guide Average. The tedious manual process was one significant check that reduced
the downward pressure on prices.
But since I am very unlikely to ever sell here again, and quite likely to resume
buying at some point, I would LOVE to see a feature that helps to reduce prices
even more. So I would vote yes if this were a formal suggestion.
Foster
|
Agreed. Actually, the system as it is is already working in your favour as a
buyer - thee part out system being so poorly designed and unstable drives alot
of sellers to use Brickstock. Brickstock retrieves prices WITHOUT VAT - which
means that for all European sellers, it retrieves prices that are significantly
lower than what you get parting out on the Bricklink website. The result is sellers
underpricing without being aware of it, fuelling the global race to the bottom.
|
Maybe, maybe not. There are a lot of sellers in that bottom end of the market
that make up prices with fees and charges. You cannot compare prices in the price
guide without factoring fees etc. If the average is 10c and the minimum price
is 7c, if one seller sells at 10c with no fees, he is no different to the seller
at the bottom at 7c with charges and fees that knocks the price back over 11c.
I had me one like that just last week: no fees on the terms page when I got the
invoice, fees and charges excluding shipping were 40% of the order value, knocking
all of the individual prices that seller was asking on those parts from the bottom
5% to way over the average price.
When you actually spend some time really looking at those prices, virtually all
of them are exclusive of fees and charges - meaning the price guide is actually
just false advertising since hardly any of those sellers are actually prepared
to sell at the price they have listed at. And those are just the ones that are
honest enough to tell you upfront about extra fees, there are still a large volume
of sellers who charge those fees included in the shipping charge, sometimes an
extra 50% over and above the actual shipping charge. They are very very aware
of where they are pricing, and it has nothing to do with a race to the bottom,
but everything to do with luring unwary buyers.
|
What you say is true in many cases. But experienced buyers (such as myself)
will always read the seller's terms and feedback, thereby eliminating most
of the surprise and problems with extra fees. My point remains that having an
easy automated feature for many sellers to quickly list thousands of lots for
a certain percentage BELOW the Price Guide Average WILL put even more downward
pressure on prices and the Price Guide. Good for buyers; not so good for sellers.
So sellers... be careful what you wish for.
Foster
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Feb 16, 2019 10:38 | | Subject: | Re: We need a modern way to part out sets. | | Viewed: | 87 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, HallBricks writes:
...
| | There are of course lots of different features that could be implemented to make
the Part Out tool even more powerful, like more advanced ways to set up automatic
prices, like 10% below average etc.
|
When I was selling here I was very strongly opposed to the idea of automating
pricing to undercut the Price Guide Average. My thinking then was that nothing
would increase downward pressure on prices or accelerate the "race to the bottom"
some sellers here engage in more than giving them a way to automatically, easily,
quickly and repeatedly price thousands and thousands of lots BELOW the Price
Guide Average. The tedious manual process was one significant check that reduced
the downward pressure on prices.
But since I am very unlikely to ever sell here again, and quite likely to resume
buying at some point, I would LOVE to see a feature that helps to reduce prices
even more. So I would vote yes if this were a formal suggestion.
Foster
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Aug 4, 2016 10:20 | | Subject: | Re: Replace merge with FB to a negative | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Voted yes. I like the idea of feedback given to oneself automatically becoming
negative when duplicate accounts are merged. Years ago, I made a suggestion
to simply not add these feedback as BrickLink currently and inexplicably does:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=522617
But your idea is better.
I also like the idea of automatically and permanently banning such dishonest
members.
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jul 20, 2016 10:52 | | Subject: | Re: standard deviation on price indices | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I voted yes. This suggestion has been made many times before, including by myself.
There is no reason why users cannot have the OPTION to exclude extreme data points
when using the Price Guide. Just like we now have the option to exclude incomplete
sets from the Price Guide. If someone does not like this option, then don't
use it. But don't deny it to others who would find it useful.
The idea that more information is better is not necessarily true. Not if you
include "information" that is misleading, untrue or a mistake. Furthermore,
it has been long established in statistics that removing extreme end-point anomalies
can make the data and averaging more accurate and statistically relevant.
This OPTION can be implemented as a percentage as the OP suggests, or in a fixed
manner where the highest and lowest one or two listings or data endpoints are
excluded when determining the average.
But in addition to this option, I would also include the further OPTION for members
to select MEDIAN price data as opposed to the mean or average.
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jul 16, 2016 07:51 | | Subject: | Re: Do away with feedback | | Viewed: | 79 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, QCBricks writes:
| |
Why do buyers need "accountability" beyond paying for their orders?
|
Because they are the other half of the contract and are legitimately expected
to act fairly and in good faith in following the seller's and BL's terms.
If not by you, then by numerous other sellers.
| | When you walk into your local supermarket...
|
Oh come on! You KNOW that shopping in a supermarket in no way compares to shopping
at a BL store. This has been explained countless times.
| | I really just don't get this notion at all. Beyond issues surrounding payment
what is there? Take payment (paid, didn't pay, charged back, etc) out of
it and to me, every argument comes down to "I want to make the buyer suffer consequences just because..."
|
It is insultingly dismissive of legitimate seller concerns to suggest that they
want to penalize buyers out of spite or "just because". I don't know what
has caused you to have such a jaded view of BL sellers, but in my experience
more than 99% of them have been wonderful and go out of their way to provide
excellent courteous service to their buyers.
And as has been repeatedly explained in the past, there are many things buyers
can do (and have done) beyond merely making payment that can legitimately affect
how the seller feels about the transaction or which could form a valid basis
for informing or warning the community about future dealings with such buyers.
This includes bogus PayPal reversal claims, chargebacks, claims of account hijacking,
excessive claims of non-receipt, illegal demands for customs fraud, refusals
to pick up packages from customs because they don't want to pay the duties,
threats to file PayPal claims if the seller does not reimburse them for customs
duties, angry insulting outbursts, bogus emotional accusations of seller fraud,
profanity and vulgarity in their communications with sellers, refusal to communicate
and amicably try to resolve problems before leaving feedback, unreasonable demands,
harassment, and other misdeeds and irrational behavior that make the transaction
experience difficult, unexpectedly costly or unpleasant for the seller.
Granted... The vast majority of the times buyers are fantastic and everything
is fine. But for the one or two percent of times when it is not, I see no legitimate
reason why sellers cannot leave appropriate feedback honestly expressing how
they feel about the transaction and helping the community by cautioning other
sellers in the future. That is way more than "just because". And the fact that
a small minority of sellers may abuse this right is no reason to withhold it
from everyone else.
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jul 15, 2016 22:00 | | Subject: | Re: Negative Feedback: What if? | | Viewed: | 119 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I oppose any suggestion that would delay the ability of members to warn other
members via honest feedback. Prompt feedback minimizes scams and protects both
buyers and sellers. There have been several times - as both a buyer and seller
- where fresh feedback saved me from scams or bad experiences. I don't believe
the relatively rare problem of retaliatory feedback warrants taking away, limiting
or postponing buyer and seller protections.
The feedback system is NOT broke. It needs to drastic fixing. Please calm down
and keep things in perspective.
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jul 15, 2016 17:23 | | Subject: | Re: Do away with feedback | | Viewed: | 123 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, QCBricks writes:
| |
This idea that buyers will just go crazy and start leaving untrue feedback is
all balderdash. It is right up there with statements like "I won't take
PayPal because you just get ripped off all the time". As I have said many times
before, this is such a non-issue.
|
Well, if you are justifying this on the small frequency of occurrence, let's
use that same justification to reject the idea that the small frequency of seller
feedback retaliation justifies fundamentally changing the feedback system 16
years in. Non-positive feedback for sellers is warranted in only a small percentage
of cases. And the vast majority of those cases do NOT result in retaliatory
feedback from sellers. So we are talking about something that happens with less
than 1% of orders. That makes it as much a non-issue as buyers leaving retaliatory
feedback for sellers.
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jul 15, 2016 15:37 | | Subject: | Re: Do away with feedback | | Viewed: | 140 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, QCBricks writes:
| | The better solution would be to eliminate feedback on buyers
|
This has been suggested - and rejected - many times, going as far back as when
Dan was still running things. I am with the majority who think this is a bad
idea. Seller reputations are extremely important and greatly affect their sales.
To allow some buyers to leave unfair or undeserved negative feedback with impunity
would be very costly to many sellers. Moreover, there were many times as a seller
when I found a buyer's feedback profile very helpful in determining whether
and how to proceed with their order, how to ship their order and whether I should
require insurance.
| | It has been well established that the threat of retaliatory feedback for buyers
is huge.
|
No, this has NOT been "established". It has been CLAIMED, but not proven. Repeatedly
making the same claim does not magically make it true or "established".
| | When this came up a few months ago, Figbits, myself, and several others
looked through quite a bit of buyer feedback to only find that the retaliatory
feedback rate against buyers can easily approach 30% or more...almost across
the board.
|
Please present those numbers (FACTS) again. I don't recall them being anywhere
near that high.
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jul 15, 2016 15:24 | | Subject: | Re: Do away with Lego | | Viewed: | 137 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, jedvii writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | Hmmm, in a world where everything seems to change every 30 secs it is kind of
nice to have some things that remain familiar.
I would personally like to
keep some of the old BL and changing FB after 16 years seems like making everyone
newbies again.
A simple extension of the field lengths might give a lot of bang for the buck.
Robert
|
+1. As a buyer, 99% of the time I have absolutely no problem relying on the
BL system to help me evaluate risk and determine where to shop. Feedback is
very helpful to me not only as a buyer, but when I was a seller as well. Despite
the vocal tiny minority who complain, BL's feedback is fine and needs no
fundamental changing. It isn't broke, so it needs no fixing.
Robert makes an excellent point about changing a system that has been used for
16 years and how any such change could negatively and unfairly affect the tens
of thousands of BL members who have already earned more than a few feedback.
But I do like the idea of extending the comments fields, mainly for non-positive
feedback.
Thor
|
Might be helpful if there was a 5 start rating on Certain aspects like shipping,
separation of variants, accuracy of part count, etc.
|
So instead of one subjective 3-star system we should have three subjective 5-star
systems? And how do you propose to convert all the feedback previously earned
by members into this new system? For example, how would you convert my current
8,882 feedback score under this new system? After 13+ years on BrickLink, do
I start out again as a newbie?
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jul 15, 2016 12:15 | | Subject: | Re: Do away with Lego | | Viewed: | 205 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | Hmmm, in a world where everything seems to change every 30 secs it is kind of
nice to have some things that remain familiar.
I would personally like to
keep some of the old BL and changing FB after 16 years seems like making everyone
newbies again.
A simple extension of the field lengths might give a lot of bang for the buck.
Robert
|
+1. As a buyer, 99% of the time I have absolutely no problem relying on the
BL system to help me evaluate risk and determine where to shop. Feedback is
very helpful to me not only as a buyer, but when I was a seller as well. Despite
the vocal tiny minority who complain, BL's feedback is fine and needs no
fundamental changing. It isn't broke, so it needs no fixing.
Robert makes an excellent point about changing a system that has been used for
16 years and how any such change could negatively and unfairly affect the tens
of thousands of BL members who have already earned more than a few feedback.
But I do like the idea of extending the comments fields, mainly for non-positive
feedback.
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jun 16, 2016 14:45 | | Subject: | Re: Shipping cost suggestion: PayPal Fees | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| |
Marc's stats seem to conflict with the idea that orders are down but at the
moment it is any thing but normal.
|
Those stats are themselves conflicting and inconclusive. Even the author admitted
in his comments that orders were down (as much as 100 orders per day right after
the upgrade). The only issue in doubt is whether that decline is "significant"
or not. But to the MANY MANY members who have posted complaints about not receiving
ANY orders or much fewer orders after the upgrade or much smaller orders than
usual, I am sure they will tell you that the decline as it affects them is very
"significant".
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2016 19:44 | | Subject: | Re: Estimated shipping costs = "TBD"... | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, JayBeeOnline writes:
| |
I don't have a shop, but it's easy.
|
Open a shop, start selling and shipping, and THEN come back to tell us how "easy"
it is.
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2016 08:39 | | Subject: | Re: Autofinder should block Least Favourite store | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I disagree. From a business point of view it is best to broaden selling and
purchasing opportunities. A buyer can OPT to exclude least favorite stores from
their searches if they like. But the default setting should be as open and broad
as possible.
As a buyer I have often bought from stores I least favorited. Their being a
least favorite store is just one of many factors I considered. But I never make
it an all or nothing proposition.
Thor
|
|
| Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Jun 4, 2016 12:15 | | Subject: | Re: File option on Order placed | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, PaulOfBricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, kzinti writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Sorry, but I voted no. I don't think buyers should be able to change order
status to completed and file it away before the seller has marked it as paid
or shipped. While I understand (and share) your frustration with sellers who
are lazy about changing the order status, allowing buyers to change the status
prematurely would open it up to much confusion, gaming and abuse.
Thor
|
I took this as they were just wanting the ability to have the File checkbox on
the Buyer side regardless of order status, to file the order away on their end
so it would not pop up in their order view, not necessarily change the order
status.
|
Y?es this /
|
OK, now I understand. Sorry for my misunderstanding. I will change my vote to
yes so long as this suggestion will only allow buyers to file away orders.
Thor
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
USA, North Carolina
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)