TheFish said:
I was on UGOTDA7's side for a long while, because i had not really read the info on the links, but before i posted i wanted to reread all the information to make sure i knew what i was talking about.
I have to say it seems like UGOTDA7 might have it wrong.
Yes, it is true that FedEx does not sell "insurance" in that exact phrasing. However,it does sell "declared value" liability which covers any item with a declared value over $500 or whatever.
Even in the links provided by UGOTDA7 there is three cases
1) Monitor - damaged - insured for $1000, paid $88 by fedex because electronics are reimbursed by the Orion blue Book. THat sounds al ittle unfair, but its like insuring ur toyota for 1,000,000 and getting back 2,000 cuz the blue book of cars said so..its kinda fair.
2) I-book - stolen - the shipper wrote down $600 as the value, the receiver received $600, and then an additional $300. His gripe was that the FedEx pple knew it was worth more - umm..so what, its about whats on the piece of paper.
3) Gas Sign - stolen - received only $100..BUT..the shipper had shipped it ground and did not pay for any additional "declared value" pass the $100 (as far as what I can read).
So, yes, technically FedEx does not sell insurance, but I think this has more to do with their company policy, and possibly their limitations as a corporation (companies that sell insurance have lots of regulations to comply to in numerous countries). But even from the complaints above, it seems clear to me that all cases were solved as expected. In cases 2 and 3, FedEx was clearly not at fault, they paid for the claim up to their stated maximum BECAUSE additional declared value was not purchased - which is 100% inline with the "insurance" policies of UPS and USPS.
By the way, i know reading comprehension. I teach LSAT and GMAT among other things.
For UGOTDA7's FedEx gripe to be factual, there has to be a lot of links where pple shipped items with ACCURATE declared value above $500 which was somehow lost, stolen, or damaged in transit and NOT BE reimbursed that declared amount.
Damn, I was just about to go to bed, but since I have so much time on my hands I'll go ahead and answer this now.
I'll say it again, Fed-Ex has their policies written in such an ambiguous way as to be able to screw the customer at their leisure. Not only that, these policies are not fully able to be understood by just about anybody, to include Fed-Ex employees I have discussed this with. I believe this is intentional on their part.
For example, you say this:
"However,it does sell "declared value" liability which covers
any item with a declared value over $500 or whatever."
However, Fed-Ex policy says this:
6. Shipments (packages or freight) containing all or part of the following items are limited to a maximum declared value of US$500:
1. Artwork, including any work created or developed by the application of skill, taste or creative talent for sale, display or collection. This includes, but is not limited to, items (and their parts) such as paintings, drawings, vases, tapestries, limited-edition prints, fine art, statuary, sculpture, collectors' items, and customized or personalized musical instruments.
2. Film, photographic images (including photographic negatives), photographic chromes and photographic slides.
3. Any commodity that by its inherent nature is particularly susceptible to damage or the market value of which is particularly variable or difficult to ascertain.
4. Antiques, or any commodity that exhibits the style or fashion of a past era and whose history, age or rarity contributes to its value. These items include, but are not limited to, furniture, tableware and glassware.
5. Glassware, including, but not limited to, signs, mirrors, ceramics, porcelains, china, crystal, glass, framed glass, and any other commodity with similarly fragile qualities.
6. Plasma screens and flat-panel display screens (all types).
7. Jewelry, including, but not limited to, costume jewelry, watches and their parts, mount gems or stones (precious or semiprecious), industrial diamonds, and jewelry made of precious metal.
8. Furs, including, but not limited to, fur clothing, fur-trimmed clothing and fur pelts.
9. Precious metals, including, but not limited to, gold and silver bullion or dust, precipitates, or platinum (except as an integral part of electronic machinery).
10. Stocks, bonds, cash letters or cash equivalents, including, but not limited to, food stamps, postage stamps (not collectible), traveler's checks, lottery tickets, money orders, gift cards and gift certificates, prepaid calling cards (excluding those that require a code for activation), bond coupons, and bearer bonds.
11. Ostrich and emu eggs.
12. Collector's items such as sports cards, souvenirs and memorabilia. (Collector's coins and stamps may not be shipped. See the Prohibited Items section.)
13. Guitars and other musical instruments that are more than 20 years old.
So are you sure you want to stick with your statement that they will cover any item with a declared value over $500? Now what was that you were saying about reading comprehension? Sorry, I couldn't resist, (Part 1).
These technicalities are very important because many cues could fit into the categories of art, antiques, or collector's items. For example, iIf you ship a $15,000 Szamboti and Fed-Ex loses it and says it was a collectors item and then gives you $500 you are going to be pretty upset I imagine. Especially if you bought $15,000 worth of "insurance" that you later found out was worthless. Of course, we as pool/cue people understand the nature of the value of cues, do you think Fed-Ex does? All it takes is for them to say no and what recourse would you have? Take them to court? Yeah right.
You mentioned earlier that value declared over $500 which was then paid for with by the customer was covered by Fed-Ex. You say that for my gripe to be factual there would have to be a lot of cases (why it has to be "a lot" I don't know), to paraphrase, where additional declared value was paid for by the customer, the item lost, and Fed-Ex not covering this additional coverage.
Well, the monitor guy paid for coverage for the amount he bought something for, which seems accurate and quite reasonable to me.
Reference the monitor:
"For $3.50 he purchased $1,000 of coverage, since that's what he had paid for the monitor in 2001."
Notice that this is well over the standard limit ($100 in this case as it was ground), additional coverage was purchased, and what did he receive from Fed-Ex?
"Caminetsky filed a claim -- an ordeal in itself, he said -- and Federal Express eventually owned up to being at fault. The company then offered him a settlement: $88."
Hmmmmmm. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but that sure seems like a Fed-Ex screwing to me. He didn't even get half of what a refurbished replacement would cost.
The guy specifically mentions this:
"A refurbished version of the Viewsonic P810 sells for $179 on Shopping.com and a similar, new 21-inch monitor made by Viewsonic costs nearly $500."
More key points the screwee makes:
"The Federal Express representative who sold him the coverage didn't mention the tariff or suggest any limitations in the coverage. Indeed, Caminetsky said the
Federal Express representative told him his monitor would be replaced if something happened to it."
"In reality, the coverage Caminetsky bought was worthless. Federal Express automatically covers any losses up to $100, so Caminetsky was already covered for the blue book value of his computer monitor."
You reference that Fed-Ex uses some trade book to determine value of the monitor, as if that is OK. I consider that a cop-out if there ever was one, I think you see this as well. For a cue example, if a Scruggs sneaky pete sells for $700 on Ebay, gets shipped by Fed-Ex, was "insured" for $700, gets lost, and Fed-Ex then decides since it is no longer made, that is too low of a cue to be even in the Blue Book, they see other brands of sneaky petes selling for $50, then they determine that it is only worth $50 and give you this $50 you would be fine with that? I don't think so.
Reference the iBook situation, there is enough blame to go around. I posted that link to yet again demonstrate that Fed-Ex's policy is not able to be understood. I don't even think Johnny Cochran (rest in peace) could make heads or tails of it. Here is what the guy said of the shipper of his iBook:
"He assured me that this wouldn't be a problem, and that FedEx would pay the full amount to replace the computer."
Notice that this idea of replacement value was the same understanding as the guy with the monitor. Coincidence?
Well, now that guy knows better. I'm sure he'll use a different service in the future, here is what he says:
"I think I'll avoid sellers (individuals and resellers) who only use FedEx for a while. The whole experience has lent credibility to the US Postal service, who publish their loss ratio because they're proud of their success. FedEx doesn't publish this number, and now I know why."
I agree.
Reference the gas station sign. You say he did not pay above the standard coverage for any more declared value. You really should have scrolled down just a bit more. He says this:
"Thats my point.
I Insured to the full value, $432.00, while filling out shipping info in Ship Manager. It doesn't make any difference, if the items being sold are of the variety mentioned (collectibles), whether they are insured for $100.00 or $1000.00, you could only get $100.00 reimbursed best case scenario. However,they will take your extra money for insurance, no questions asked. So, in essence, for the items I sell, there isn't any purpose in spending an extra penny for insurance above the $100.00 they provide gratis, or for putting down a value above $100. I suppose some may have third party insurance for such items ?"
Once again, what was that you said about reading comprehension? Sorry, I couldn't resist, (Part 2). I guess you just missed that part as it was down a little further.
But notice the rest of his input as well. Do you not think he has a legitimate gripe? Once again, Fed-Ex has used their ambiguous policy to screw somebody.
I'll continue to stick with the points I posted earlier:
1. Fed-Ex does not offer "insurance." (See policy).
2. Fed-Ex lost/damaged claims are a proven hassle. (See links).
3. Fed-Ex guidelines are ambiguous at best. (See policy).
4. Fed-Ex can choose to screw customers based on these ambiguous guidelines. (See links).
5. Fed-Ex has a history of screwing customers on claims, especially when this amount is over the standard "declared value" limit. (See links).
6. If one chooses Fed-Ex with expensive items, one is playing with fire. (Well informed common sense).
To sum up the entire issue in one short statement, I will reference the monitor guy yet again who says this about Fed-Ex:
"Nobody tells you this stuff when you're beginning to ship anything," he said. "I think people should know they're getting ripped off."
Amen.
