Escrow: Any Point?

[wyverndude]

I recently bought a (beautiful, by the way) LF lens from eBay, for a

very good price because the seller didn't have very many feedbacks.

<P>

In consideration of the low feedback number, I opted to use escrow,

to which the seller willingly agreed; and everything worked out great.

<P>

Here's the question:

In looking into the escrow process in detail, it seems to me; the

seller could have just as easily sent me a rock in a box. Escrow

asks for proof of shipment and proof of receipt of shipment, but they

aren't going to be able to confirm anything else about what was

shipped, certainly nothing about the condition.

<P>

Likewise, it seems I could have claimed that the seller sent me a

rock in a box, and refused to release escrow.

<P>

So, unless I'm missing something, it seems like even with escrow, it

still comes down to a case of my word against the sellers'.

<P>

Considering that, I was thinking that I would have been better off

using UPS COD. UPS of course will not (how can they?) get involved

in any way in <I>what</I> is shipped, but -by using COD- can

guarantee that you do get <I>something</I> shipped to you before you

pay up... which it seems, is all that escrow can guarantee. But UPS

COD is cheaper, faster, and easier.

<P>

Escrow is going to give you a chance to argue about it; which UPS COD

won't -but I don't know how much good that would do.

And I guess that's the real question.

<P>It seems in the event of receiving something defective, I could

have taken it to a camera repair shop and gotten a written estimate,

with record of the serial number of the lens... but, if all I got in

the box was a rock... or an entirely different item, then it's just

my word against the sellers'.

<P>

Note: I know there has been much debate about it; personally, I think

eBay is wonderful/fantastic/cool/great... but that's not the subject

of this post.

Has anyone had an experience arguing escrow? (as a buyer OR as a

seller) And what happened?

<P>

[neal_shields]

I noticed that too. Also, it doesn't seem to me that paying by credit card through Pay Pal provides much protection? The way I read the examples you are using your credit card to pay Pay Pal and Pay Pal is paying the seller. Your not going to be able to go back to your credit card company if you don't get the merchandise, because PayPal provided the service you paid for; to pay the seller.

 

Unless the seller has at least 50 feed backs and has Payment Protection, it looks to me like if he ships you a rock, you are going to be between a rock and a hard place trying to get your money back.

[andrew robertson]

Actually, escrow.com won't pay the seller until you accept the shipment. You have the

ability to inspect shipments made to you. So, when you get your package, open it! Make

sure it's not a rock, and then sign for the shipment. If it is a rock, DO NOT accept the

package - send it back to escrow.com and they'll give you your money back, and the seller

their rock back.

 

Duh!

[greglyon]

The escrow service I used worked like this...I got to accept that the product was as represented before the escrow company released the funds to the seller. I had something like 2 or 3 days after receipt of the item to complain In the case of an expensive lens I bought two years ago that meant that I ran out, shot a roll of film, got it developed, inspected it...THEN released the funds to the seller. Likewise, had I said 'you sent me a rock' he has control over whether the funds were released back to me...

 

If escrow.com doesn't work that way it's not worth anything more than pay-pal which by it's contract negates any credit card protection that we usually enjoy with credit purchases.

[adam_eberbach]

Generally if a seller is will to accept your choice of escrow site you have nothing to worry about. If you didn't get to examine your item before paying that wasn't real escrow and something went wrong with the process.

 

Watch out for the fake escrow sites. Any escrow site should have a telephone number and address listed where you can find them and you should be able to find it mentioned here, on google groups, or listed on the auction site where you initiated the transaction.

[heller_harris]

What about protecting the seller? What if the Seller ships a lens, but the Buyer claims that it was a rock and sends a rock to the escrow company? I never ask for escrow and I don't offer it.

<br><br>Heller<br>

<a href="http://hollywoodscriptanalysis.com">HollywoodScriptAnalysis.com</a>

[wyverndude]

Andrew: You've entirely missed the point.

<P>

Picture yourself as the escrow person. Seller says he shipped a lens. Seller provides serial number of lens, shipping tracking and proof of delivery; buyer confirms receipt of the package... but says he got a rock. Who's the liar?

<P>

Yes, escrow is designed to allow me to examine and approve the item before releasing payment to the seller; and yes, this behooves the seller to describe the item accurately -he says it's mint, I get it scratched up; I reject it, return it (who's to say I can't send him a rock??? Who's to say <I>I'm</I> not the one that scratched it?)- <B>BUT,</B> (and this is the point) what about a blatant lie? On the part of either the buyer or the seller?

<P>

Has anybody run into this type of a problem?

[markci]

The whole point of escrow is that the money is not released until the buyer says to release it. And it's not returned to the buyer unless the seller agrees. If there's some sort of dispute then the money sits in escrow until some sort of professional arbitration.

 

But that should rarely happen because:

 

1) The seller has no incentive just to ship a rock, because the buyer won't release the funds.

 

2) The buyer has no incentive to falsely claim a rock was sent, because the seller won't allow a refund.

[klix]

Everything does come down to the buyer's word against the seller. Now having said that...

 

1) For most escrows, the buyer pays the escrow fee. Thus, it is a disincentive for the buyer to intentionally scratch up something. Of course, accidents do happen.

 

2) There is typically an agreed-upon number of days for the buyer to inspect the mechandise.

 

3) Even afterthe buyer scratches up something and returns it, the seller has the opportunity ton inspect the item before the escrow company releases the funds back to the buyer.

 

4) If the seller does not accept, then the escrow holds on to the money, until the buyer and seller can come to an agreement. Within eBay, there is an opportunity for mediation.

 

But, as with anything ebay, and in general, online purchasing, both seller and buyer do roll the dice.

[douglas_greenberg]

Mark Ci is on target here. If the buyer is not satisfied, he/she will not release the funds and the deal is off. The whole point of escrow is that the buyer has this level of discretion/control. I can see no way that you will be stuck for "a box of rocks."

 

I purchased a Nikon 500mm. f4 P lens on ebay using escrow, the service provided in association with ebay. There actually was a small problem with the lens (one of the mount pins was missing, necessitating a $200 repair, which I asked the seller to pay for).

I found the people at the escrow service helpful and conscientious, and it was very clear to me that I had to be satisfied with the merchandise before the funds would be released. The seller was a nice guy and I think he would have made good the situation in any case, but having the escrow people as intermediaries here was helpful, in my estimation.

 

 

For large purchases with a stranger, I think the escrow route is definitely worthwhile.

[mph]

Man, lots of responses that don't address the question.

 

The question is: If the seller ships a lens, and the buyer lies to the escrow agency and says he got a box of rocks (and refuses to release the funds), what protects the seller? In other words, why should the escrow company believe the buyer rather than the seller?

[joe_hodge]

The escrow company protects BOTH parties:

 

The buyer is protected because their funds are not released to the seller until the item is recieved and inspected.

 

The seller is protected because the escrow will not release funds back to the buyer until the seller confirms that the item has been returned in satisfactory condition.

 

If either party is outright lying, the escrow company hlods the funds until the dispute is settled. The settlement may be by arbitration, lawsuit, or any other means, but nobody gets the money until there is a settlement.

 

I insist on escrow for large-dollar purchases, with large being "more than I can afford to lose", or I don't deal.

[klix]

<i>Man, lots of responses that don't address the question. -- Matthew</i>

<p><p>

<h2>READ</h2> my response rather than skimming it. #3 and #4 address the question.

[wyverndude]

Thank you for your responses.

<P>

I would conclude from what has been said (and not said) that escrow is helpful in that the buyer or the seller know that the money can get tied up if there is a dispute; and although that is of value, it is limited.

<P>

In the case of the example given, where Seller claims to have sent a lens, Buyer claims to have received a rock, who ultimately gets the money remains the unanswered question.

<P>

This then leads one to the inescapable conclusion that the Buyer is fairly well protected against blatant fraud -if the Seller tries to pull anything, the Buyer can tie up the funds, and the Seller can't be sure of getting the money in the end- leaving the Seller much more vulnerable.

<P>

Or so you would think.

<P>

When entering into an escrow transaction, Buyer submits money, Seller sends product. Buyer is then "out" the money that he agreed to pay for Product. Seller is "out" the product he agreed to ship... but has no money to show for it until Buyer is happy. Buyer then, has nothing to lose by attempting to fraud Seller by making a false claim. Maybe Buyer will get the money back, maybe not -but the Seller has everything at risk.

<P>

But consider this: Very Sneaky Seller ships a rock. Roles are now reversed. Seller still has the product, Buyer is then the one "out" the money, with nothing to show for it. Seller then is the one who has nothing to lose from the outcome of the Escrow dispute. The money is tied up, but maybe the dispute will settle in favor of the Seller.

<P>

A person would <i>really</i> have to be a first-class a**hole of the highest order to pull this kind of fraud either as the buyer or the seller... but there are a few (fortunately, only a very few) of those out there.

<P>

My conclusion would be:

<P>

I will continue to use Escrow. It <i>is</i> better than UPS COD because there is the opportunity to file dispute... which is of debatable value except:<br>

As a seller, I will use a mail service to pack and ship. It will cost more to pay someone else to put it in a box for me, but I then have an impartial witness, to at least protect me against the buyer claiming that I sent a rock (admittedly quite unlikely, but for the couple extra $'s -which I can charge to the buyer anyway- it's worth it). Condition of course is something else; but depending on the item, the fact that I had someone else pack it for me would cover me or help, at least.<BR>

As a buyer, I'll open the package in front of an impartial witness. In my case, that's pretty easy since all of my mail comes in through a mail service, and one of the clerks has to get my packages and hand them to me anyway (and the one that I usually see also happens to be a Notary Public :) )

<P>

Best way to protect yourself against a bad transaction would be (IMHO) the eBay Feedback. I cannot imagine the kind of first-class a**hole that would ship a rock instead of a $600 lens (or to <i>claim</I> to have received one) would have the patience to build up an excellent Feedback before pulling a stunt like that. Although it can be done, it would take a lot of time and/or trouble.<P>

Please don't accuse me of beating a dead horse; yes, this topic has been discussed VERY thoroughly here, but ... I'm assuming if you're reading this, you were still interested. :)