@jt-libra wrote:
@dutchman48 wrote:
It is cheaper for me to send out a light packet with private insurance than to use tracked packet.
Also, CP does not insure many items that private insurance does, so the free CP insurance is totally useless for me.
I'm very interested in this statement. Would you mind elaborating? Do you still print your labels through PayPal and insure the packages separately? What is the process?
I would say 75% of my items are sent Light Packet. Tracked Packet is out of the question in cases where the value of the item is less than the shipping cost, e.g. a $15 DVD or mascara that would cost $16.00 to ship with tracking. It's become quite worrisome, since more and more buyers are fraudulently claiming INR, either through an official claim or via e-mail, when they realize the item was shipped without tracking, With enough experience, you get a feel for those who are lying. Some sellers advocate the "virtual cookie jar insurance" but that doesn't work for me. I'm already subsidizing shipping to the U.S. so there is nothing extra to put in the cookie jar.
I wondered when I saw 'dutchman's' comment too. I'd never heard of such a thing. I hope he'll come back and let us know.
I'm in more or less the same boat as you. I can send the majority of my patterns by Light Packet, although I'm fortunate to have a very honest buyer base. The only INR I've ever had was due to a natural disaster at the destination, not buyer fraud.
I use Auctiva and they do offer insurance (on tracked parcels) at good rates, which I've used on a few occasions to buy excess insurance for expensive items (sent with tracking). The problem is that these are all U.S. companies, and their restrictions and exclusions are based on U.S. realities. As far as I know, some proof of acceptance of the item at the point of mailing is generally required in order for coverage to be valid, which in U.S. terms means tracking. Here for example is part of the coverage text from Auctiva, whose agent is actually Shipsurance (my emphasis):
"In order for a package to be covered, the shipping carrier must have verified acceptance of your package for mailing. This is found on the respective tracking websites of the shipping carriers. If a shipping label is printed but not scanned by the carrier as accepted it is deemed as never been mailed and there is no coverage."
I suppose one could possibly take the chance of using something else as a "verified acceptance". However, it wouldn't make any sense to me to take a risk on the insurance being invalidiated if I'm buying insurance in order to avoid risk. In Auctiva's case, they will only insure a non-tracked USPS parcel sent domestically (i.e. within the U.S.), with coverage limited to $1,000.00. I'm going to try to find out, but given this statement, I doubt they'd cover a Canada Post non-tracked parcel, especially not anything sent abroad.
If you do use a 3rd party insurer, it's crucial to get beyond all the front-page website hype to find and carefully peruse the actual terms and conditions (and exclusions) that pertain. Usually those terms are in small print well down the bottom of the page (for good reason)! Otherwise, you may just be throwing good money away.
For example, Auctiva's insurer (actually Shipsurance), being a U.S. company, won't insure parcels going to any country sanctioned by U.S. law, which doesn't help Canadians wanting to ship to certain countries that our own government allows. Below is the list of Auctiva's/Shipsurance's excluded destinations, which I imagine would also apply if you use Shipsurance directly. Note the "aircraft touchdown" provision -- I recall a few years ago a Canadian seller who had run into this problem with a shipment to Russia. The parcel (an expensive item) went astray somewhere on the ground between the airport and the destination and wasn't covered.
In other words, you really don't have any coverage at all for the leg of the trip where you'd probably most need it in those countries!
"Shipments sent to Afghanistan, Angola, Bolivia, Burma, Congo, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast (Cote d'Ivoire), Liberia, Nigeria, North Korea, Paraguay, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela. Any location that would be in violation of any U.S. economic or trade sanctions including OFAC Restricted Countries. For shipments to Russian and other Commonwealth of Independent States countries (includes Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan) coverage ceases upon touchdown of the aircraft at the airport of destination or upon discharge from the overseas vessel at the destination discharge port."
At any rate, paying an extra dollar or two to insure a $20 item wouldn't be an attractive idea in my situation even if it could be done. I accept the relatively low risk of an occasional $20 item, but you're probably in a category where fraud is more of an issue.
There is no easy answer, unless 'dutchman' has a secret he'd like to share. I don't think Tracked Packet is the solution for these kinds of items either. Still, I must admit that I've been surprised more than once when I had a multiple-item order and planned to use Small Packet -- on checking Tracked Packet I found it was less than $2.00 more, so I opted for it. However, the extra money is only really justifiable on a multiple-item order where the total value is sufficiently high.
With Canada Post rates forever rising, I think paying for insurance on Light/Small Packet is going to become less and less practicable anyway. I see it as a matter of outlay for insurance vs. the likely cost of losses in a given time period. And of course losses can be written off against income.
w~~_7.JPG "pjcdn2005"){kind=avatar}
