"Shipping Insurance?" Topic

Why is it that the buyer pays for the shipping insurance? Isn't it the sellers responsibilty? The buyer has paid for the postage at the time of purchase, shouldn't the shipping be the responsibility of the seller?

Why is it that the buyer pays for the shipping insurance? Isn't it the sellers responsibilty?

In the UK the seller is the owner of the parcel until delivered, once delivered ownership passes to the buyer.

See this from the UK distance selling regulations:

Can I charge the consumer the cost of insuring items that I send out?

3.20 No. These items belong to you until they have been accepted by your consumer. So you cannot charge your consumers for carrying risks that you should bear. See paragraph 3.36 for more information.

Michael.

I think that this is rather amusing.

The buyer pays what the seller asks for – how the hell do they know if it does or does not include the cost of insuring the shipment.

Yet another example of a stupid and unenforcable law.

Of course you charge the consumer, you may not tell them you are doing so but you will do it anyway. It is part of the cost of doing business (where necessary) and obviously the consumer pays that.

If I gave away "free insurance," the price of domestic shipping for all packages would rise from $6 USD to $8. USD That would mostly benefit the post office, and not me or the customer.

Terms in the US can be specified as desired by the seller.

We used to ship FOB Origin all the time, which means the buyer takes title as soon as the items are shipped, so are responsible for any losses. They have the option to purchase insurance, if they wish.

Yet another example of a stupid and unenforcable law.

Actually, it is a rather good law. It encourages the seller to manage delivery risk. The seller is forced to consider the safest, most cost-effective shipping method, something the buyer may not be expert in…especially without physical access to inspect the size and condition of the item.

Sellers do not actually do what GildasFacit suggests. They would be at a competitive disadvantage if they bought excessive insurance or unnecessary insurance to other sellers that assumed more appropriate risk.

religion

I did say 'where necessary' so that covers your point.

Any supplier who doesn't consider the most effective (cost and risk) is fairly obviously going to be uncompetitive so why bother with yet another pointless regulation.

Regulation of on-line sales has gone too far IMHO and the huge increases in postage charges are likely to even up the competition with bricks and mortar soon anyway.

My point was that if the buyer is responsible once shipment is made, shouldn't the seller be responsible once the buyer sends off his payment, whether via internet or post? In other words, if I pay by mail my responsiblity ends with putting the payment in the mail box just as the seller's responsiblity ends with a trip to the post office.