I Was Told Stamp On Consignment Was Lost Or Sold

I agreed and paid for a scott#1 us stamp via paypal. The transaction went through and money was given to seller. Now the seller sent me an email that the cosigner told him the stamp was lost or sold.
Has anyone ever heard of such a thing. The seller told me not to give him a negative feedback as it was an honest mistake.

I've had similar happen to me from time to time purchasing covers on ebay. I'll pay for it with Paypal, only to find the money refunded soon thereafter with an apologetic note that the item cannot be found or was previously sold. It happens. I've never left a negative feedback, though I've been disappointed. If it happened more than once with the same seller, I might reconsider.

If someone consigned something with me to sell I would require that I be in posession of said item. Whether you give negative feedback or not is up to you, but if someone puts something up for sale it is my opinion that they are warranting that they have that item in their possession.

I would check the sellers feedback. If it is without blemish, I wouldn't be the first. If he has a history of problems, you owe it to other buyers to document it.

Bottom line, he didn't honor the contract.

After you get your refund, then I would give that seller a negative.

regards, Theron.

Well, it doesn't always turn out that way. One one occasion, a seller who lists on ebay, and who also has a store, informed me that he had sold it in his store before he could take it down off of ebay. In another case, it was a seller who lists on both bidstart and it has sold on one and when I bought and paid for it on the other it was no longer available. And at least 3 or 4 times I've had sellers notify me that they simply cannot find the item, but offer no other explanation. Only once did I suspect the seller wasn't being straight with me, but I couldn't prove anything, and let the matter drop. In every case, my payment was refunded without my asking for a refund, and in several of the cases, the first inkling I had that something was wrong was when I was notified by Pypal of the refund.

Many dealers have items in their ebay stores that they also have for sale elsewhere - including, but not limited to: Brick & mortar stores, stamp shows, other auction sites, and so on. This sort of mistake occasionally happens and as long as the seller refunds your money, that should be the end of it. However, I have personally had sellers refund, then relist the same item at a later date - which REALLY bothers me. If this seller has a good selling history, let it go. If you see the item relisted in the near future, I would file a comlaint.

Brian

Just thought I would convey my thoughts. I sell on ebay and other sites. At times, I have several thousand listings. Preparing the listings takes a great deal of time. I have several large stock books I keep the listed items in. Over the past 30 days, I sold two items and received payment. I then discovered I could not find these two items. I immediately contacted the buyers, explained I could not locate the items and refunded payments made. Over the next week or so afterwards, I did locate the items, contacted the buyers and explained I had now located the items and asked if they still wanted them. They both did. I sent new invoices, received payments and mailed out the items. It does happen. Sellers can and do misplace items...and it's not always a purposeful event. I would not leave negative feedback unless it occurred with the same seller again. It may be just a simple mistake.

thanks guys for the education in buying stamps on the internet. I am glad I asked for your experienced advice. I will let it drop. I did not realize the mechanics that stamp sellers operate under. the seller did notify before paypal did and he offered a special discount if I still wanted a scott u.s. #1

We previously had this discussion and I think opinions were pretty much split. Obviously mistakes can sometimes happen but just as obviously this behavior can also be hiding a less than ethical act. I concur with most the other folks, it is hard to condemn a seller if it only has happened once and no other monkey business appears to be afoot. Even if you suspect something, it is difficult to prove unless you have an apparent 'trend' that can be observed.
I think you have to give the benefit of the doubt unless you have some other over-riding and significant evidence.
Don

I respect the prior comments, but in my view, the seller hung himself by stating that the transaction was consigned, yet the consignor apparently never delivered physical possession of the item to the consignee-seller. In many states, this constitutes fraud. The seller should have offered a sale contingent on delivery by the third party possessor - but of course that would scare off all the buyers. The problem with asserting a consigned sale and then canceling it is that the buyer may have given up other opportunities to pursue this one - which would be grounds for damages in a large-dollar sale with similar parameters. Bottom line, it's risky for any seller to offer to sell an item that the seller knows s/he does not possess.

I don't know about the 'fraud' (consequential) part, but in the Uniform Commercial Code ('many states'), we find:




... and then it gets complicated ;)

Personally, I could easily see myself (until today, that is) being asked to sell something that was in the physical possession of its owner, and my calling it 'consigned' because I did not know that I needed to be in physical possession of the item to use the word 'consigned'.

I've acted as an agent many times, and would have thought (until today) that 'consigned' was just a high-fallutin' word - rather like using 'suite' in place of 'room' - that merely means that I have some sort of binding right to sell something, and not that I need to have it in my grubby, little paws.

[tangential_anecdote]

Once upon a time, I was emphasizing to my oldest the importance of continuing to educate yourself, like, forever.

She: "Oh, I know, Dad; my GrandMa reads The New York Times every day, and she knows something about everything."

From which I coin the phrase: "Philately: your gateway to knowing a little something about everything." Even the UCC.

[/tangential_anecdote]

Cheers,

/s/ ikeyPikey

Wow, some really tough guys in this thread. Honest mistakes happen all the time - or is your life experience different? Stuff gets misplaced, goes lost, gets sent to the wrong buyer - this doesn't happen much but it does happen to anyone who sells stamps... I know when it happens to me I get that sinking feeling in my stomach - I absolutely hate disappointing someone. And, also wasting their time. To the original poster, the only thing that would tick me off would be being "told" not to leave bad feedback - say what? You are going to hose me on the transaction, and then "tell" me to not leave a certain type of feedback? I would be tempted to leave a negative just for this reason. Otherwise, I believe that honest mistakes do happen, and it really isn't that big of a deal. John

I'm generally with you, John, and heck, we're talking about stamps - it's not real estate or fine art where there could be very high lost opportunity costs, or even a unique item involved. What bothers me about the OP's scenario is the suggestion that the seller KNEW he did not have possession of the item, yet still offered it for sale, AND sold it AND collected payment, THEN went chasing the item. That has a high risk of wasting everyone's time, and even once, I find it a "big deal." If you want to sell other people's stuff, please be sure you have it first!

We all have frames of reference that color how we see these things, and this particular scenario I find hard to believe ... rather than honest error, it's equally possible that the third party possessor (if they even exist) just didn't like the price realized in the sale.

I keep forgetting, sellers aren't allowed to make human mistakes...

Negative feedback? Seriously? Come ON now.

I've been on both sides of this equation. As a buyer, I have had situations where I thought the seller was having "sellers remorse", especially if I got the item at a bargain price. On other occasions, either it was a duplicate listing or the item sold at another venue. This is most frequently the case with ebay sellers who also sell direct via their own website or at shows. One particular dealer still has ebay listings for items I bought from them years ago.

It's frustrating, but it's not the end of the world and is understandable as long as it is not a repeat scenario.

And yes, believe it or not, sometimes [CENSORED] happens. As a seller, there have been a few occasions over the years where I've simply lost or misfiled items. It's annoying when that happens, especially when I *KNOW* I've seen the missing item, but just can't quite put a finger on it.

Apologies and a swift refund are what is in order.

But negative feedback???

This is the same sort of idiocy that leaves negative feedback for not using CURRENT postage stamps on parcels (never mind that the merchandise ordered was just fine).

I can see how this could develop, but when the problem is brought to the seller's attention and nothing is done to fix it, that I cannot see as anything but unscrupulous. Don't give me a load of cow dung about how a seller gets too busy to attend to a problem they apparently see as small potatoes. Any seller who has been shown the problem and does nothing to fix it is culpable, and ought to be liable for something.

Tolerating neglect is intolerable.

I ran into this problem with a seller here who sold me a lot at a new lower price that he had sold me earlier for more, but had not yet delivered. He explained to me that there are glitches in the automated systems for posting lots to ebay that can cause duplication of listings or fail to remove old ones. Okay, I get that. But the buyer isn't responsible for that problem, and when a buyer is stung by such a problem, then for the sake of continued business (if nothing else) the prudent business person should be prepared to compensate or to suffer the consequences. And the consequences are, and ought to be, loss of a transaction and a strike against the sellers good name. In my case he simply disregarded the later sale and issued a refund at the lower price. Hmmmm. Would it have worked for me to do that if the second purchase had been the higher number?