It's a small conundrum, but I'd still appreciate some advice.

[Dangerously Amused]

Background:

Last year while traveling out west my skin became very dry. While passing through a mall there I came upon a kiosk with a lady who was giving out free samples of their lotion, so I tried it. To my happy surprise it was the most amazing lotion I’ve ever found (and I’ve tried a LOT of them over the years), and far better than what I’d brought along with me. The lotion is expensive, but it was “on sale” at the kiosk for $40. per jar. I bought a jar on the spot to use for the rest of the trip. I love it.

After I used up the first jar I decided to see if I could buy it cheaper online. I did find a few resellers who apparently buy the jars in bulk and then offer them at about $30 per jar. I bought a jar from one of those people and was happy with it. That second jar recently ran out, so I just bought two more jars from a different reseller.


Here’s where the problem comes in:

The first two jars I bought - the one directly from the lady in the mall and the next from the first reseller - were both full to the very top, in fact so full that there was a vacuum between the lift-off seal and the lotion. BUT, the two jars I recently bought both had an obvious amount of lotion missing, about five or six heaping tablespoons worth.

It occurs to me that this last seller is skimming a little off the top of every jar so as to maintain his or her own free supply of the expensive lotion and then reselling the jars, advertising them as “new.” (The seal on the jar is not “tamper proof,” just a lift-off seal to keep the lotion from seeping through the threads in the lid while in transit. So I have no way of knowing for sure whether the jar was opened before resale.)


I know it’s not THAT big of a deal in the broad scheme of things, but for whatever reason this particular situation is irritating me. So I wrote to the seller and politely told him/her pretty much exactly what I just wrote here, without coming right out and accusing him/her of skimming the product. S/he wrote back to deny that any product was missing… but then offered to send me another jar for free if I would agree to provide a positive transaction rating.


So now I don’t know what to do. The seller has only a few (like two or three) other transaction ratings so far, all positive, so a negative rating with the explanation I have would be pretty damaging to his/her reputation. Part of me says to turn down the offer of the free jar, enter a negative rating and honestly explain why to fairly warn other potential buyers. FWIW, the seller can’t give me a revenge negative transaction rating in return because s/he already left a positive rating for me since I paid promptly.

On the other hand, I have no solid proof that the seller skimmed some product off the top and even if s/he did, I still got a good deal all things considered. So another part of me says to give the seller the benefit of the doubt, take the free jar, leave a positive transaction rating and forget about it. But I am afraid that if I do that I will feel like a sellout. And I would hate that.

I know that this is a completely totally dumb little problem given all the other problems out there in the world, but I’m really having a difficult time deciding how to handle this. I want to do the right thing.

What would you do?


Thanks.

[Nickster]

1. I think that the seller offering up a free jar of lotion for a positive feedback is pretty

telling as far as I'm concerned. You don't just give out a relatively expensive product for free based on a claim that is supposedly baseless. If you leave a positive, they're one step closer to keeping their scam alive.

So....maybe give a neutral rating and figure out a way to weasel around outright calling a fraud a fraud.

[Dangerously Amused]

5. Yep, that's what I thought too about the quick offer for a free product.

Sounds like a guilty conscience speaking.


Then again I think, what if they are being honest? For example, if the manufacturer changed the product formulation and now it just settles more in shipping, or if the manufacturer changed the fill line (which I have seen them do after they've introduced a new product and the consumer has established a brand loyalty)... then it will seem to them that I am blackmailing them by taking advantage of their few ratings.

OTOH, I never asked for the free jar, just recited the facts and voiced my concerns. (Alternatively, they also offered to refund my money in full, including postage, if I sent the jars back.)


I thought about leaving a neutral rating, but that won't show up one way or another in their overall "rating" percentage; that is, it will still show 100% positive based on the few positives they do have unless I leave an actual negative rating... so the warning effect for other buyers might be lost.


Maybe a "neutral" is the way to go, though. I'm going to give that some more thought today. Thank you for your insight.


:hi:

[Nickster]

6. Well, I can only speak for myself, but I certainly look at neutral ratings as well as the

flat out negative ratings before buying anything. If you're not 100% sure, then a negative may not be called for, a neutral would be the next best thing. If they only have a few ratings right now, your neutral would be more obvious.

[Dangerously Amused]

9. True, and a very good point.

Turning down the free jar and giving them a neutral rating is looking better as an option.


Thank you.

[AllegroRondo]

10. I have to agree with this

the fact that they are offering a free product to get you to leave positive feedback is a bad sign.

Leave a neutral feedback explaining what you did here. You have bought the product elswhere and received jars full to the top, but this seller's products are not full. Maybe its not the seller's fault and the problem lies with their supplier, but at least future buyers will be warned that they may not be getting exactly what they think they are.

[Dangerously Amused]

12. A reasonable solution.

And that is the way I am leaning right now.


Thank you for adding your thoughts.


:hi:

[ThomCat]

2. I'd find a different supplier

and not leave any rating at all.

[Nickster]

4. Yeah, but not leaving any rating allows people like that to keep scamming other

people. If you're going to do that, you might as well accept the free product.

[Dangerously Amused]

13. Yeah, I'll definitely never do business with this person again.

I hope... as it looks like s/he just changed account names recently. Eh, no matter - from now on I'll stay with those who have a lot of positive transaction ratings.


:hi:

[MissMillie]

3. we have a lotion kiosk in our mall

I'd be happy to see if it's the brand you like, and pick some up for you. If the mall here doesn't have the same lotion, maybe someone else here at DU can find it at their local mall.

That way, you won't have to deal w/ that seller any more.

[Dangerously Amused]

7. Awwww, thank you! Aren't you the sweetest thing?!

:loveya:


I don't mind buying it online from a reputable seller, and as long as I can do that I wouldn't think of imposing on your tremendous kindness and goodwill. :) But thank you again for your generous offer. :hug:


There are other honest sellers out there, I just need to find them. I guess there is something to be said for the online buyer/seller rating system after all. Now I've learned my lesson and I know better - next time I won't buy something that would allow a reseller to filch some without a trace, from someone with only two or three ratings.

Duh. You know I really should have thought of that in the first place anyway. Honestly, sometimes I am ridiculously naive for my age. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

:blush:

[masshole]

8. Give them a positive

A weak positve, but a positive, especially if they are a relatively new seller. They did offer you a free jar of this expensive lotion right? Seems like good customer service to me.
I guess it depends on how strongly they denied any product was missing. I mean how would they really know - they didn't pack he stuff, they just resold it, right?

[Dangerously Amused]

11. I can't tell how "new" of a seller s/he is.

They have one of those little "this is a previous seller working under a new name" icons. Which can mean something as innocuous as s/he changing or expanding a good, reputable business and starting with a new name for legitimate business reasons, or as nefarious as s/he needing a new name after getting too bad of a reputation under the old name.


Here is the seller's exact reply:

"These jars were taken exactly from a case of 12. I assure you that they have not been altered in any way. I will on the other hand refund all your money if you send it back to me. I will even pay for the shipping. I assure you that it is an 8oz jar and that if you have a bottle that is 8oz or place it on a scale it is half a pound without the Jar. but I am glad you brought this to my attention. I would offer to replace it but it would be from the same box. My only other suggestion is that you said they apperaed to be 80% full so 20% empty. So in escennse you are missing 80& of a jar. I could send you another jar. If this will ensure a positive rating."


Yeah, I don't get the math either. But whatever.

[necso]

14. The problem is that you can't be 100% certain

that the reseller did skim, since they* denied it. (There are other alternatives.)

I would check to see if the container maybe indicates that it includes a smaller quantity (fl-oz's are different than oz's) of the product (keeping the same container but putting less in is a common OEM practice; there could also be settling, a short batch, some mistake, etc).

I'd take the deal, since this person is trying to make good. But if it happened again** (yes, I'd deal with them again), then I'd leave negative feedback (of course, only an idiot would "short" you again).

If this person is deliberately shorting, then sooner or later they'll get nailed. And maybe once caught (by you, perhaps), they won't try it again.

*: They, them, their: used after an indefinite singular antecedent in place of the definite masculine form "he"/"him"/"his" or the definite feminine form "she"/"her". {It's a usage of long-standing.}

**: You would need to measure/weigh and verify the shortfall. And if they send you another "short" as part of the deal, then obviously the deal is off, which leaves you with another little conundrum.

[Dangerously Amused]

17. More good insight, thank you!

>I would check to see if the container maybe indicates that it includes a smaller quantity...

Check. The manufacturer has only two jar sizes that I am aware of, at least they advertise only two sizes on their website. And I do think that is the approach this seller is taking: that if my jars were a little short, then the whole batch was a little short.


>I'd take the deal, since this person is trying to make good. But if it happened again** (yes, I'd deal with them again), then I'd leave negative feedback (of course, only an idiot would "short" you again).

Ha ha. I would sort of have them over a barrel that way, wouldn't I? They would KNOW I'd check every single jar...

[necso]

21. It works sort-of like this:

1) You buy some product.
2) You express some unhappiness with the deal.
3) The seller offers to make good. (Offering a trade, that is, making good in return for positive feedback, is a little crass; but avoiding negative feeding is part of what any seller wants when they offer to make good. And one shouldn't render an overly-hasty judgement.)
4) You accept the offer.
5) You go from there. If it's a full jar (the seller has corrected whatever the problem was -- at least as regards you -- and you should have more than 2 full jars in total), then great, leave good feedback (but it could be general, not specific, in nature). If it's not a full jar, then you have to think about it (you could leave something "positive", but simultaneously damning).

I have found that some people, who you wouldn't want to have anything to do with privately, act much better when it can affect their very-public public-persona.

However, your suspicions (that the jars were shorted -- and that the make-good jar will also be short... for consistency) ring true to my ears. And who knows what the seller is thinking; they could continue on with some game (like continuing to short you -- or not sending you anything).

But they'd have to be pretty stupid to try to get away with such (apparently) obvious shorting. (Once the negative feedback starts piling-up, however, the threat of more negative feedback loses some of its force.)

Not that such stupidity, dishonesty, etc, is any rarity -- as you seem to know.

[idgiehkt]

15. wow.

I don't know what to think about this. I might just take the free jar. As long as other people are free to rate her negatively as well...after a while she might see that offering people free jars when they get p.o'd is more expensive than than just not skimming. :shrug:

[Dangerously Amused]

16. Now there's an angle I hadn't thought of...

Hmmm...


Thanks for that idea!


:hi:

[Karenca]

18. ditto- - nt

[flvegan]

19. Take the free jar, and see how full it is.

The seller won't skim off this one, most likely.

If it's the same as the other allegedly "skimmed" ones, set it aside, don't use it. Order from another seller. Compare the contents. Same jars, right? Should weigh the same on a grocery scale. That would be your absolute proof. You could also have an undeniable rating to give her. A positive with a "my contents settled further, but it was the correct amount" (just in favor of anyone else in your shoes) or calling her on her skimming if that's what the evidence shows.

On edit: Off topic, but in your sig...is that picture a work by Amanda Moeckel?

[Connonym]

20. This is sort of like poisoned drink scene in Princess Bride

If the second bottle is full would it indicate that the first bottle was indeed skimmed? Or could it be the whole case was defective? If the second bottle isn't full would it mean that the whole case was defective or that the seller shorted this one so that you would *think* all the bottles come that way?

Logic isn't my strong point but I don't think you'd be able to make a definitive decision RE skimming based on a second sample from the same case.

[mainegreen]

22. Find a different reseller, don't take the jar, don't leave feedback.

You don't trust them so the business relationship is ruined. You don't know she is skimming, so a negative feedback would be wrong. The free jar, if you take it is a bribe, and that's not right either.

My 2 cents.
:shrug:

[Breeze54]

23. Trust your instincts!

They will serve you well! ;)