Store Credit No Refund??

[Lowell Lemon]

Yeah, I don’t know where you got any of that from my post. All I’m saying is that that if you order something, and you pay for shipping, if you don’t receive what you ordered, you shouldn’t have to pay for shipping again. I don’t think it’s ‘entitled’ to expect to receive what you paid for.

I also don’t think the assertion that vendors would have to raise prices 5-10x to cover shipping on DOA replacements is even remotely accurate, like not even close (if covering the cost of DOAs would raise prices that much, that would be mean over 90% of shipments are DOAs, and if that’s the case then ethically they shouldn’t be shipping live animals in the first place). I don’t have a problem with prices going up a little bit, if that’s what needs to happen, for the vendor to work shipping on DOAs into their overhead, but I think that charging the consumer an extra $30-$50 to receive the product (I don’t view live animals as ‘products’, but legally, that’s what they are) they already paid shipping for is tantamount to extortion (they don’t offer refunds, only store credit, so unless you’re okay with just losing all the money you spent, you have no choice but to pay shipping again).

I’m well aware that nearly every vendor charges shipping for DOA replacements, and I’ve never complained about it to a vendor when I’ve had DOA’s, because those are the TOS I agreed to, but I think as an industry wide policy, it’s unethical and anti-consumer.

It's is okay we can agree to disagree. But products and livestock are very different and require different care as I am sure you agree. I think you missed the point I was trying to make but that is okay as well. My main take away is small shipments sent through a channel that drops packages from conveyor belts 10' or more while sorting at the hubs is not the way to ship fish and corals. I have gone through the package design phase for UPS and FedEx for products and ignoring their rough handling requirements ignores many of the reasons they should not be used for livestock. Even airfreight has its problems but it is a faster, safer way to deliver livestock. Forcing shipments into a channel that Is designed for dry goods only is a higher risk. Then, expecting high care in a low care environment is not reasonable. The shipper has no control once the livestock is delivered to the shipping company. We are now expecting great results from a degraded delivery system not designed for live shipments. Just saying that placing all the burden on the small mom and pop shipper is unfair and unreasonable. They worked with the limitation the buyer placed on them by using a poor channel of delivery for these small shipments. If you want small shipments you will have to accept the risk with the seller. Again a level of trust between seller and buyer will have to develop in order to overcome the poor delivery options. Assuming the seller is somehow always at fault and responsible is unfair and unreasonable. The seller and the buyer should honestly share the cost of doing business with these limited options.

 

[MaxTremors]

It's is okay we can agree to disagree. But products and livestock are very different and require different care as I am sure you agree. I think you missed the point I was trying to make but that is okay as well. My main take away is small shipments sent through a channel that drops packages from conveyor belts 10' or more while sorting at the hubs is not the way to ship fish and corals. I have gone through the package design phase for UPS and FedEx for products and ignoring their rough handling requirements ignores many of the reasons they should not be used for livestock. Even airfreight has its problems but it is a faster, safer way to deliver livestock. Forcing shipments into a channel that Is designed for dry goods only is a higher risk. Then, expecting high care in a low care environment is not reasonable. The shipper has no control once the livestock is delivered to the shipping company. We are now expecting great results from a degraded delivery system not designed for live shipments. Just saying that placing all the burden on the small mom and pop shipper is unfair and unreasonable. They worked with the limitation the buyer placed on them by using a poor channel of delivery for these small shipments. If you want small shipments you will have to accept the risk with the seller. Again a level of trust between seller and buyer will have to develop in order to overcome the poor delivery options. Assuming the seller is somehow always at fault and responsible is unfair and unreasonable. The seller and the buyer should honestly share the cost of doing business with these limited options.

The buyer doesn’t choose the shipping method, though. Most vendors don’t allow you to choose air freight, they usually have a bulk agreement with either FedEx or UPS (and they are the ones who get reimbursed for s shipping, along with the cost of the coral, for late/undelivered shipments, as Pacific East Aquaculture mentioned in this thread). I agree that it’s not an ideal way to transport live animals, but no one is forcing the vendors to use these shipping methods, no one is forcing them to offer shipping for $30-$50, they choose to make it their business model. The onus shouldn’t be on the consumer to take the hit when they pay the vendor directly for shipping, don’t get to choose the shipping method, and aren’t the party that gets reimbursed if the shipment is delayed or DOA. You really think it’s fair that the consumer has to pay shipping for a DOA replacement when the vendor gets reimbursed for the original shipping (and the coral) when there is a DOA? The vendor isn’t out anything, the shipping the consumer pays on the original order is just profit when it’s a DOA (since they get reimbursed by the carrier), charging the consumer for shipping again (with no option to cancel the order and get a refund), is an unethical, anti-consumer business practice.

 

[fish farmer]

It's is okay we can agree to disagree. But products and livestock are very different and require different care as I am sure you agree. I think you missed the point I was trying to make but that is okay as well. My main take away is small shipments sent through a channel that drops packages from conveyor belts 10' or more while sorting at the hubs is not the way to ship fish and corals. I have gone through the package design phase for UPS and FedEx for products and ignoring their rough handling requirements ignores many of the reasons they should not be used for livestock. Even airfreight has its problems but it is a faster, safer way to deliver livestock. Forcing shipments into a channel that Is designed for dry goods only is a higher risk. Then, expecting high care in a low care environment is not reasonable. The shipper has no control once the livestock is delivered to the shipping company. We are now expecting great results from a degraded delivery system not designed for live shipments. Just saying that placing all the burden on the small mom and pop shipper is unfair and unreasonable. They worked with the limitation the buyer placed on them by using a poor channel of delivery for these small shipments. If you want small shipments you will have to accept the risk with the seller. Again a level of trust between seller and buyer will have to develop in order to overcome the poor delivery options. Assuming the seller is somehow always at fault and responsible is unfair and unreasonable. The seller and the buyer should honestly share the cost of doing business with these limited options.

I get most of what you are saying and agree with the bad middleman service, but who is the one packaging up these tiny boxes and shipping them out...the seller. I'm a online buyer of less than 5 frags at a time, they are in the tiniest of boxes. I ASSUME the seller is an expert in coral shipping so they should be packaged properly. No where when I buy corals do I see where I can upgrade to bigger insulated boxes(which would cost more to me). The seller is allowing small sales to occur where failure may be more likely.

I have finally seen some sellers actually refuse to ship below certain temperatures and above others, finally COMMON SENSE is being used. These aren't time sensitive organisms, they can hold off for better shipping conditions.

This also goes to the buyer, don't buy stuff when it is too hot or cold, unless it is a larger shipment that can be packaged properly. I've seen enough Memphis hub horror stories. Watch the darn weather.

 

[Lowell Lemon]

@fish farmer and @MaxTremors ,
There are no other options for small shipments that is crystal clear. Often the seller gets stuffed by the shipping company as I illustrated by the recent loss we absorbed due to clear shipping company negligence ($1400.00).

Until you experience being on the sellers end you lack the experience throughly. Anyway dead horse beaten again.

 

[cdnco2004]

I do not mind a store credit only refund for DOA as long as they include shipping with that. I feel like people/company that wont give shipping credit should be avoided.

 

[BroccoliFarmer]

But at what cost? With the high level of losses due to the sensitivity of livestock and coral, I couldn't even see a insurer willing to remotely consider getting into the aquatics game for coverage against loss. It will be about as ugly as a degenerate gambler betting the rent check on black at the roulette table .

Or we could just call Lloyd's of London, they insure legs and vocal cords, let's see the premium for some high end acros and rare fish .

The person willing to insure will actually be the seller them selves. 50 for the coral but for 25 more, we can call it insured.

 

[BroccoliFarmer]

@fish farmer and @MaxTremors ,
There are no other options for small shipments that is crystal clear. Often the seller gets stuffed by the shipping company as I illustrated by the recent loss we absorbed due to clear shipping company negligence ($1400.00).

Until you experience being on the sellers end you lack the experience throughly. Anyway dead horse beaten again.

beat the horse, maybe people will understand the difference between law and emotions.

 

[fish farmer]

@fish farmer and @MaxTremors ,
There are no other options for small shipments that is crystal clear. Often the seller gets stuffed by the shipping company as I illustrated by the recent loss we absorbed due to clear shipping company negligence ($1400.00).

Until you experience being on the sellers end you lack the experience throughly. Anyway dead horse beaten again.

I actually have experience shipping trout eggs, big boxes that are designed for the purpose, fully loaded with eggs and ice can go several days, but they weigh loaded around 20 lbs. So spendy to ship. All I'm pointing out is if small shipping options are challenging perhaps retail sales directly to consumers shouldn't exist. Much like you stated previously about shopping local. If getting corals to my house required me to buy a large minimum like a wholesaler.....then I and many others would be buying from local businesses.

 

[Mandopicker]

I have given up on one particular LFS because of their policy and costumer service. Had 2 fish die within 24 hours so contacted the store and nothing but voice-mail. I wasn't looking so much for a refund but trying to figure out why both died. The owner never returned the multiple messages I left. This was a small LFS where the owner was the only employee. It is not just the mail order companies with these issues.

 

[OfficeReefer]

Hey everyone I want to share my opinion on something I’m tired of seeing.

“If coral arrives is doa , we DO NOT do refunds only “store credit”.

like what type of policy is that? I don’t think that’s fair to put you into that position where you’re stuck even if they shipped to you and it died you’re still stuck with them no matter what , if you place a coral order for a specific coral and it came doa you should have every right to get your money back not a “store credit”. What are you guys thoughts? I’m seeing a lot of online vendors doing this nonsense now almost all , it sucks , I miss old school reefin

I don't like this policy either, which is why I only buy local corals. Probably lots of people just like me too. Maybe someone will change my mind, since I have never had a ticket win.

 

[JaimeAdams]

I have given up on one particular LFS because of their policy and costumer service. Had 2 fish die within 24 hours so contacted the store and nothing but voice-mail. I wasn't looking so much for a refund but trying to figure out why both died. The owner never returned the multiple messages I left. This was a small LFS where the owner was the only employee. It is not just the mail order companies with these issues.

You know what, honestly I run a small LFS. It's me and the owner. I'm there when the store is open and the owner stops by here and there. I don't know how to check our voice mail and I can quarantee you that he doesn't either. I do answer the phone during business hours though.

 

[xCry0x]

The issue with the store credit is that it puts all risk on the buyer and removes the option to choose to double down on the risk or not.

I bought a small fruit tree online.

It died within the warranty, I filled a claim, got a store credit

Only problem was the tree was now more expensive so I had to spend more plus shipping again.

They then proceeded to ship the thing during a heat wave and so the second one arrived totally dead.

Now I'm out shipping x2 and spent like $300 on a tree I could buy in season at home Depot for $40. Good thing I have a $100 gift card if I want to roll the dice a third time. Lol.

Same thing happened recently buying a fish online for the first time.

Fish arrived dead. Now my option is to go double down on the expense when is rather just politely end our business relationship on good terms.

The credits work when you sell volume B2B because your B2B customers will likely be placing another order anyway.

B2C on a one off purchase is rough.

I take store credits on Amazon because my family buys junk on there all the time. I'd be happy to do the same with BRS because I can spend the credit easily. Same with a big time seller like WWC.

Store credit to a company I was expecting to be working with on a one time transaction now forces me into a relationship I don't want to be in.

 

[xCry0x]

Ah and point of clarification.

I personally understand store credit on extended warranty claims.

I likely killed that tree in my example.

Similarly, if a buy a fish and it dies with a 7 day guarantee, at that point I'm likely at least partially responsible. Plus I appreciate the company has to protect against people doing dumb things -- like me over watering my tree.

But straight DOA is another thing.

It's a breaking of confidence in the vendors ability to deliver the good. And I should have the option on if I want to invest in a round two.

 

[mehaffydr]

Hey everyone I want to share my opinion on something I’m tired of seeing.

“If coral arrives is doa , we DO NOT do refunds only “store credit”.

like what type of policy is that? I don’t think that’s fair to put you into that position where you’re stuck even if they shipped to you and it died you’re still stuck with them no matter what , if you place a coral order for a specific coral and it came doa you should have every right to get your money back not a “store credit”. What are you guys thoughts? I’m seeing a lot of online vendors doing this nonsense now almost all , it sucks , I miss old school reefin

i say if you don't like the policy don't buy from that vendor. Every seller has the right to set a policy and you have the right to buy or not. Your choice. No one is forcing you to buy.

 

[xCry0x]

i say if you don't like the policy don't buy from that vendor. Every seller has the right to set a policy and you have the right to buy or not. Your choice. No one is forcing you to buy.

I think the issue is most vendors bury the details of the policy while plastering the customer pleasing message everywhere.

"Worry free livestock with our DOA guarantee!"

Not "Worry free livestock with our DOA store credit guarantee!"

I get it . It's marketing. And the details are available if you look.

But the messages are written that way deliberately because they check the box in the buyers head that this potentially risky transaction is safe.

If buyers actually wanted store credit, then you would plaster that all over the website. They know people would prefer the option, so then they bury the details.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

I think the issue is most vendors bury the details of the policy while plastering the customer pleasing message everywhere

I personally have not experienced this; in fact every online vendor I've purchased from in the last few years has been very upfront with their DOA policy on their website and included a printed copy in the shipping box.

 

[xCry0x]

I personally have not experienced this; in fact every online vendor I've purchased from in the last few years has been very upfront with their DOA policy on their website and included a printed copy in the shipping box.

I mean.. I haven't ever bought anything from liveaquaria but just went and checked their site as an example given how large of a retailer they are.

When I look at a fish on their site.

"7 day guarantee"

When I click to read more, it tells me all about how it's an industry best guarantee, and they want to ensure only the best service.

Then you click read more from there, which takes me to another page that then states how it's a store credit that lasts 1 year.

I'd call that fairly buried

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

I mean.. I haven't ever bought anything from liveaquaria but just went and checked their site as an example given how large of a retailer they are.

When I look at a fish on their site.

"7 day guarantee"

When I click to read more, it tells me all about how it's an industry best guarantee, and they want to ensure only the best service.

Then you click read more from there, which takes me to another page that then states how it's a store credit that lasts 1 year.

I'd call that fairly buried

OMG! You had to click a whole 2 times???

No, I don't think that clearly posting a link to the 7 day guarantee and then clearly posting a link to their full return policy is "burying" anything!

 

[cdnco2004]

i say if you don't like the policy don't buy from that vendor. Every seller has the right to set a policy and you have the right to buy or not. Your choice. No one is forcing you to buy.

They a lot of times burry the fact they wont cover shipping.

I think the issue is most vendors bury the details of the policy while plastering the customer pleasing message everywhere.

"Worry free livestock with our DOA guarantee!"

Not "Worry free livestock with our DOA store credit guarantee!"

I get it . It's marketing. And the details are available if you look.

But the messages are written that way deliberately because they check the box in the buyers head that this potentially risky transaction is safe.

If buyers actually wanted store credit, then you would plaster that all over the website. They know people would prefer the option, so then they bury the details.

Exactly

I mean.. I haven't ever bought anything from liveaquaria but just went and checked their site as an example given how large of a retailer they are.

When I look at a fish on their site.

"7 day guarantee"

When I click to read more, it tells me all about how it's an industry best guarantee, and they want to ensure only the best service.

Then you click read more from there, which takes me to another page that then states how it's a store credit that lasts 1 year.

I'd call that fairly buried

Hey what do you know! Exactly the livestock online seller I am complaining about as well... Good job LiveAquaria in in giving all your customers the same BS I guess. I had same issue with them. Return shipping not covered and you still have to pay full cost to purchase the replacement and then later afterwards they will apply a credit, so you still have to pay in advance, their system does not allow you to apply store credit. So I purchased three fish in my first purchase. One arrived DOA. They gave me credit for the one fish. Then I ordered same fish again paid for shipping again as well as for the new fish. The new fish arrived DOA. I still paid for the second fish that arrived DOA had not gotten my refund for the cost of the second fish. I am not continuing to play this game with LiveQauraia. They can keep my 2 store credits now as I refuse to ever buy from them again.

 

[a.t.t.r]

They a lot of times burry the fact they wont cover shipping.

Exactly

Hey what do you know! Exactly the livestock online seller I am complaining about as well... Good job LiveAquaria in in giving all your customers the same BS I guess. I had same issue with them. Return shipping not covered and you still have to pay full cost to purchase the replacement and then later afterwards they will apply a credit, so you still have to pay in advance, their system does not allow you to apply store credit. So I purchased three fish in my first purchase. One arrived DOA. They gave me credit for the one fish. Then I ordered same fish again paid for shipping again as well as for the new fish. The new fish arrived DOA. I still paid for the second fish that arrived DOA had not gotten my refund for the cost of the second fish. I am not continuing to play this game with LiveQauraia. They can keep my 2 store credits now as I refuse to ever buy from them again.

Call your credit card company and file a dispute. Best case you get it back. Worse case they have to put on a lil extra effort to screw ya