PayPal ruling on shipment charges provided by seller, but buyer claims "Item not received".

[JDZ747]

Where can I find PayPal the ruling on buyer refund and respective shipment  service charges ?

There are in an invoice 2 elements : an item (goods) and a service for shipment (shown separately on PayPal invoice).

Now if a buyer claims "Item not received" then he cannot deny, that he received the shipment service.

In the majority of cases registered shipment take their time and can be tracked on website.

In my case Resolution Center ignored, that I provided evidence on the shipment and website tracking "in transit".

Then this means, that the shipment service was provided and respective evidence was submitted to PayPal Resolution centre.

The refund from PayPal should not ignore, that services have been delivered.

The refund should only consider the item, but I cannot find a ruling at PayPal.

[sharpiemarker]

@JDZ747 

To win an Item Not Received claim, tracking has to show "Delivered", not that it is "In Transit". In the course of a dispute/claim, PayPal will follow up on the case to make a ruling and if they see that the tracking still shows "In Transit", then you will lose. Then you can claim insurance/liability with the postal service. Alternatively, if later you find that tracking shows "Delivered" contact PayPal to appeal the case.

Edit: Now if the package is held in customs for the buyer to pick up and they haven't, and is returned that's something PayPal has to consider in the ruling.

[JDZ747]

Thanks for your input, but in theory there is a control at PayPal to ensure, that a buyer cannot claim for an item not received, when it is in transit / delivery.

Item Not Received

If the Seller can provide within the required time frame a valid proof of shipment (as specified in more detail in the PayPal Seller Protection Policy) or a respective equivalent proving shipment and/or receipt as agreed between PayPal and the Seller, PayPal will refuse to grant PayPal Buyer Protection.

That makes perfect business sense to me, but it looks like, that Resolution Centre doesn't apply their own ruling.

Ruling is more as you state, I provided evidence, that shipment still in transit and Resolution Centre ignored the evidence.