A friend has a horse for sale. Lady comes out and tries horse and says she def wants horse. No deposit left to hold horse. Buyer arranges shipping and a vet check. Lady was informed that horse needed to be paid for prior to shipping. Vet comes the day before shippers are supposed to come and finds a potential issue (owner was completely unaware of issue). Buyer decides not to buy horse, but had already wired the money to buy horse. Money was sent by western union. Seller did not pick up the money because she was waiting on vet results. The potenial buyer now wants seller to go get the money and send it back to her. That is fine, but here is the problem: Buyer wants seller to pay for the cost of the money transfer ($100). Horse was being sold for under $2500. Should seller be responsible for the cost of the wire transfer?
I vote no on seller being responsible for paying hundred bucks. Buyer beware. Buyer should have vet checked before sending money. Tell buyer to call to WU site holding her money. She can work out getting her money back on her own. Surely this has happened before where a recipient doesn't claim $ from a WU site. They have to have protocol on returning funds that doesn't involve a person standing there. Better yet, if I was the seller, I would make the call myself and get the answer to that question so if the buyer tried to put it back in my lap, I would have the answer for her.
They sent the money, they didn't wait for the vet check, their problem -
But why in the heck would anyone use such an expensive option? Banks do it for free these days...and overnighting a check (or even cash) is around $20. via UPS.
Could either party please think outside the Western Union Box for a moment?
Common sense examples...
The seller could get the money, put it in her own account and write the woman a check -sent via the 50 cent stamp (snail mail) or transfer the money via her own bank account into the buyer's bank account (usually free). No big deal. The buyer should be glad that the seller is willing to do so much for her gratis.
I assume there is no sales contract? I am always surprised people don't use them even with the less expensive horse. Just because the horse isn't expensive doesn't mean a contract is not warranted.
My sales contract states how the buyer will pay for the horse and that I will bear no portion of the transaction costs. It also deals with the decision not to buy after the vetting and the return of any deposit/funds held. It saves a great deal of hassle on the back end when things don't work out.
In my opinion the seller has no obligation to pay the buyer's transaction costs. If the buyer had to pay a fee for a wire transaction or a cashier's check, that's their responsibility. Conversely, if the seller had to refund the deposit after a vetting and incurred costs, then those fees are the seller's responsibility.
If I were the buyer and the only money I "lost" on a horse that wasn't suitable for my needs is the vetting costs and the wire fee, that would make me very happy. Whatever that cost is, it is infinitely lower than the cost of buying a horse that didn't suit my intended purpose.
Just curious. Offhand, seller should not have to pay this oddly high "wire transfer" amount. It was buyers idea to back out based on some PPE on a less expensive horse that had been doing the job soundly. Seller should not have to pay for that.
Next time, get it in writing. Both buyer and seller.
When opportunity knocks it's wearing overalls and looks like work.