Should the buyer pay for the return shipping in the event of a DOA?

Over the years I have read several TOS. In the event of a DOA some sellers request the return of the dead animal to verify that in fact it is dead and it’s their animal. There are basically two approaches: 1. the seller pays shipping back to him at his expense; 2. the buyer is in charge of paying return shipment of the body at his expense. In my opinion if the seller is guaranteeing a live arrival (as most) and requesting the return of the body to verify death he should be the one responsible for that expense. The buyer is paying to receive a live/healthy animal, why should he/she be responsible to pay for the return shipping of the dead animal? Your thoughts?

Originally Posted by The BoidSmith

Over the years I have read several TOS. In the event of a DOA some sellers request the return of the dead animal to verify that in fact it is dead and it’s their animal. There are basically two approaches: 1. the seller pays shipping back to him at his expense; 2. the buyer is in charge of paying return shipment of the body at his expense. In my opinion if the seller is guaranteeing a live arrival (as most) and requesting the return of the body to verify death he should be the one responsible for that expense. The buyer is paying to receive a live/healthy animal, why should he/she be responsible to pay for the return shipping of the dead animal? Your thoughts?

Hmmm... I guess it depends on the circumstances, so I can't really give a blanket answer for all scenarios.

If the DOA is a $50 snake or gecko and there isn't a significant amount of discrepancy as to the cause or actuality of said animal, then I wouldn't really see the point in either party incurring further shipping expense, especially if the recipient has provided substantial proof of the DOA through a picture.

If the DOA is the same $50 snake or gecko and the recipient fails to provide any sort of proof that the animal did die in transit, then I could see it feasible that the recipient pays for return shipping with the condition that after the seller inspects/verifies the animal that the recipient would be reimbursed for the cost of return shipping.

If the DOA is a more expensive animal, like a $1000 bp or something, then I think the seller would have a significant interest in verifying the identity/cause of the DOA, and should front the cost of return shipping. As a seller I'd much rather spend $40-60 for the confirmation before even discussing a refund for $1000.

That's just my opinion though, which is heavily influenced by general lack of trust in people.

Paul,

You made a valid point that I failed to factor in, the price paid for the animal. Let’s suppose it’s a moderately to expensive priced reptile. How would you feel as a buyer if after paying $500 for an animal and receiving it dead, you are asked to pay the return shipment just to verify the authenticity of your claim? Let’s assume here it’s an authentic claim, as we both know there are people out there that might want to take advantage of a situation like this. There’s no doubt the seller has every right to request the return of the dead animal. The question is if he should request that the buyer (who is absolutely not at fault) be responsible to pay for the return shipping. In my opinion it would seem fair to have the buyer ship the animal initially at his expense for the seller to inspect it. After verifying the authenticity of the claim and deciding the course of action (replacement, refund, etc.) the seller should be responsible for the shipping return shipping expense. Why would the buyer be expected to be out of the animal he ordered and on top of that pay $40 for example so the seller can verify the validity of his claim?

Regards

we have our customers foot the bill for the return of the animal/corpse and once verified a replacement or credit is made and the extra freight encountered by the customer is refunded. thats just our "policy"... everyone varies.

Originally Posted by The BoidSmith

Paul,

You made a valid point that I failed to factor in, the price paid for the animal. Let’s suppose it’s a moderately to expensive priced reptile. How would you feel as a buyer if after paying $500 for an animal and receiving it dead, you are asked to pay the return shipment just to verify the authenticity of your claim? Let’s assume here it’s an authentic claim...

If it is an authentic claim, and I knew that as the seller, I don't think I would bother with having the animal returned. I guess that another point that needs to be factored in is whether or not the two parties have had previous transactions with each other, and what type of reputation (if any) each party has.

Originally Posted by The BoidSmith

There’s no doubt the seller has every right to request the return of the dead animal. The question is if he should request that the buyer (who is absolutely not at fault) be responsible to pay for the return shipping. In my opinion it would seem fair to have the buyer ship the animal initially at his expense for the seller to inspect it. After verifying the authenticity of the claim and deciding the course of action (replacement, refund, etc.) the seller should be responsible for the shipping return shipping expense. Why would the buyer be expected to be out of the animal he ordered and on top of that pay $40 for example so the seller can verify the validity of his claim?

I guess for the same reason I would have to provide a receipt and proof of defect if I wanted to return a TV or something to Best Buy. If the seller has to refund the cost of the DOA anyway, tacking on the $40 for the return shipping wouldn't really be a big deal, in my opinion.

In general, I view most TOS as written guidelines the seller can fall back on in the event that the buyer and seller can't mutually agree on a solution to a problem. BUT, they're also there to let the buyer know what may or may not be expected should a problem arise.

Sheesh, the more I think about stuff like this, the more appealing selling wholesale seems.

very good point, i forgot to add that in my reply..... its actually quite rare we must have a DOA returned. in most cases customers are more than able to provide sufficient proof that the animal is indeed DOA and such an added expense is avoided. We only request such a return shipment if the customer is unable to prove required details beyond a very reasonable doubt. Besides, who wants to ship or crack open a box containing a carcass? Especially in summer...... Ick.

If the buyer provides pictures of the DOA to the satisfaction of the seller there should be no need to send the dead animal back. But I agree with Chris, in the event that the dead animal is requested, the buyer should pay for the return shipping initially. Once inspected by the seller he should reimburse that amount to the buyer. It doesn’t seem fair for the buyer to incur in the cost of shipping just because the seller wants reassurance that the animal is in effect dead.

Regards

With all the ripoffs going on out there, the request for "proof" is to verify not only that the animal is dead, but that it is the one that was sent. It certainly isn't unheard of that somebody a)would claim DOA to get $$ back (and keep snake), or b)would try to swap animals, and use a different dead specimen as "proof" ie: my BP dies and I purchase a female het pied from you...I could say she was DOA, and take blurry photos (best I can get with my camera, lol) of the original snake to get a better snake at no cost

Harald,

We are in agreement on that point, the seller has every right to request pictures, the return of the body even a veterinary diagnostic if he so wishes in order to determine the identity and cause of death of the animal. The point is that these are requests he makes to satisfy his doubts. We are under the assumption that the buyer is not at fault whatsoever; he just received a dead specimen. Why do some sellers then “penalize” him but stating in their TOS that the buyer is responsible for paying for the shipment of an animal that has died upon arrival? In my opinion it’s alright having them initially pay and then reimburse them. But that’s not what I have read to date in several TOS. One could argue that as long as it is in their TOS, and the buyer agreed to them it’s OK to do it, but IMO it’s not fair to the buyer.

Regards

Dan, I am in complete agreement - the buyer should not have final responsibility for return shipping of a DOA. If the seller has doubts about the claim, sure - he can request that the buyer pay the cost...but once it is agreed that it was his animal, he should reimburse that money.