Aibu to not refund this buyer?

[Sellerseller1]

Have an online website selling handmade items.

Buyers item was shipped with royal mail tracked delivery, tracking info says it was delivered to a safe place.

Customer has now emailed to say item must have been stolen from said safe place and therefore they want me to refund.

Aibu to say no? I have sympathy if it genuinely was stolen but firstly I can't just refund everyone who messages to say something has been stolen with no evidence it actually has been and secondly, I've fulfilled my obligation in that it's been sent and marked as delivered on the tracking page.

If they come back and it seems they are actually telling the truth I.e. trying to correspond with royal mail/ the police then I may as a gesture of good will replace it but I don't think I need to straight away? (Or even at all technically).

Fwiw item wasn't cheap and took a lot of work.

I have never nominated a safe space with any courier, however have been notified that packages were left in a safe space many times, usually the photo depicts my front door, which is in full view of the street on which an drugs addicts treatment centre exists, so anything left out in view of the street is stolen.

Evri and Royal Mail are the worst culprits.
@LondonJax gives good advice imo.

a recent article mentioning how rubbish Royal Mail are atm….

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/07/royal-mail-loses-360-year-monopoly-on-delivering-parcels-from-post-office-sites

What happened @Sellerseller1?

Someone on another site posted this recently: The Consumer Rights Act, holds the retailer legally responsible for goods until they are safely received. “The burden of proof is on the retailer to show goods were delivered, not on the customer to show they were not. If the seller tries to wash their hands of this then customers who pay by credit or debit card can issue a chargeback via their bank.

Which confirms what I said upthread.

I also have an online business. This has happened to me twice. Both times I’ve contacted Royal Mail. One time the delivery proof photo didn’t actually prove anything so they refunded me the cost of postage and the cost of the item, in that case I then refunded the customer too after I’d received my refund.

second time I contacted Royal Mail, they said it had been delivered so my customer had to then take up the claim with them…I didn’t hear back from the customer and didn’t provide a refund.

i think most people are honest, but sadly some try to get something for nothing.

I also have an online business. This has happened to me twice. Both times I’ve contacted Royal Mail. One time the delivery proof photo didn’t actually prove anything so they refunded me the cost of postage and the cost of the item, in that case I then refunded the customer too after I’d received my refund.

You won't have an online business for long if that is how you treat your customers. What on earth are you thinking, making a customer wait until you had been refunded? Are you actually saying that their money is less important than yours?? That they should just wait around when you have not provided what they paid for? You are really lucky that customer did not go straight to SM to warn others about your appalling service.

If you are unable to understand your legal obligations or how to cost your product to account for the possibility of loss then you should not be in business.

Gosh you’re angry aren’t you! Lots of very cross, opinions based on one comment by someone whose business you know nothing about. I bet you’re fun to deal with as a customer!

If I refunded people immediately without question, I would have no business! As it happens I have wonderful reviews, happy customers, many of whom are repeat customers.

If you ordered a turkey to be delivered from Tesco, then opened it and found it was bad - would you be happy if Tesco told you they would have to send it back to Bernard Matthews, and that they would refund you when Bernard Matthews refunded them?

Or would you expect them to replace it immediately so that you had the turkey that you paid for, or immediately refund your money?

@Haffiana this isn't about the iten quality at all though.

In this case the customer was given a choice between a fully insured and guaranteed courier delivery at one price, or a basic Royal Mail postage without insurance at a cheaper price and they chose the latter. If an ordinary uninsured item of post like that goes astray, Royal Mail will not cover the full cost. They may refund up to £20 if the value of the missing item can be proven. The limit gors up to £50 if you pay extra for Signed For which didn't happen here.

I don't think it's sensible to offer customers this choice if items are valuable, the insured courier option should be the only option. However given that the customer was given the choice and chose as less secure method without insurance the customer does bear some responsibility and it shouldn't be OP taking the loss. The responsibility lies mainly with Royal Mail but the recompense to the customer is rightly linked to Royal Mail's policies.

If the item was delivered and was bad then of course the customer should be refunded in full but that hasn't happened.

@YireosDodeAver unfortunately that's not what the law says though.

The choice of courier is not relevant to the customer.

The choice to insure is for the benefit of the SENDER. The sender pays for the courier or postage, and therefore the SENDER has the contract for insurance (or not) with the courier. The sender needs to select the level of protection that THEY need, and pass on the cost of that to the buyer. If items go missing, then it is the SENDER who is covered.

The buyer has a contract with the seller to whom they gave their money, NOT with the courier. They have not entered into any contract with the courier because they have not booked them or paid them. They are not insured with the courier at any point. Only the sender is. The sender is the only one who can make a claim.

I am staggered that people do not understand this. You do not get to dump your obligation to a buyer by blaming them for the seller not sufficiently insuring the item that they are sending.

Ok yeah that makes sense