Nominating DavidtheDavid 1 1

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 minutes ago, Red84 said:

Why should he accept responsibility for the damage if he did not cause the damage?  His failure to review the book thoroughly on receipt does not change whether there is damage.

That's an easy question to answer: lack of due diligence.

Again, this might not be too accurate an analogy, but if a tenant discovers damage to the property he has just rented...which he did not do, and for which he is not responsible...and doesn't inform the landlord, the landlord can hold the TENANT responsible for said damage.

After all...who caused it...?

We don't know who caused the damage, but the fact is, the buyer didn't report it upon receipt, and...most damning...gave every indication to the seller that the transaction was concluded to his satisfaction...THEN notified the seller after a period of time that he had not, in fact, properly inspected the book before claiming his satisfaction.

Quote

 I would also dispute that not checking the book thoroughly immediately upon receipt amounts to negligence. If anything, I'd say it is bad practice. He did not wait a month to report what he found; it was a week.  What is a reasonable amount of time? That can be debated.  His failure to report the damage for a week does not eliminate his ability for recourse if the book arrived damaged.

True! A buyer has a reasonable amount of time in which to inspect a purchase.

That isn't, and never has been, the issue, nor has anyone made that claim.

The issue is that the buyer indicated to the seller that the transaction was successfully concluded, and THEN changed his mind.

His failure to report the damage for a week is not at issue. His failure to report said damage, in the face of his own concern, COMBINED with the fact that he told the seller the transaction was satisfactorily concluded, is what is at issue, here.

[RockMyAmadeus]

7 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

I'll check it out later. I've got people lined up to pay to argue with me today, so Imma Get Payd!!!

 

Getting paid to argue =  

[Red84]

3 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

12 minutes ago, Red84 said:

Why should he accept responsibility for the damage if he did not cause the damage?  His failure to review the book thoroughly on receipt does not change whether there is damage.

That's an easy question to answer: lack of due diligence.

Again, this might not be too accurate an analogy, but if a tenant discovers damage to the property he has just rented...which he did not do, and for which he is not responsible...and doesn't inform the landlord, the landlord can hold the TENANT responsible for said damage.

After all...who caused it...?

We don't know who caused the damage, but the fact is, the buyer didn't report it upon receipt, and...most damning...gave every indication to the seller that the transaction was concluded to his satisfaction...THEN notified the seller after a period of time that he had not, in fact, properly inspected the book before claiming his satisfaction.

Quote

 I would also dispute that not checking the book thoroughly immediately upon receipt amounts to negligence. If anything, I'd say it is bad practice. He did not wait a month to report what he found; it was a week.  What is a reasonable amount of time? That can be debated.  His failure to report the damage for a week does not eliminate his ability for recourse if the book arrived damaged.

True! A buyer has a reasonable amount of time in which to inspect a purchase.

That isn't, and never has been, the issue, nor has anyone made that claim.

The issue is that the buyer indicated to the seller that the transaction was successfully concluded, and THEN changed his mind.

His failure to report the damage for a week is not at issue. His failure to report said damage, in the face of his own concern, COMBINED with the fact that he told the seller the transaction was satisfactorily concluded, is what is at issue, here.

Under your system, lack of due diligence on the part of the buyer makes him responsible for all undiscovered damage and absolves the seller fully.  That's quite a harsh punishment.

Based on your analysis a buyer would be out of luck in the following scenario.  Seller sells a book to buyer.  Buyer receives the book and notifies the seller that it looks great.  The front and back cover are glossy and look phenomenal.  All the pages are present.  The next week the buyer is reading the book and notices a small coupon towards the spine of the book is cut out.  He didn't notice this during his page count because he was merely counting the pages from the edge rather than opening the book flat.  

Based on your analysis, the buyer would not be entitled to any recourse.  That may be.  But any seller on the forum with any integrity would right that wrong immediately.  He wouldn't say, you snooze you lose.

Something should have been worked out here rather than insinuation of fraud and misdeeds.

[DavidTheDavid]

Well, we don't know that he actually contacted a detective. What smacks of duplicity to me is the initial editing of a PM when he learned that I had a time-stamped receipt from the office almost 30 minutes prior to his balking at the return, then passing off the edit as a "typo." Then he's edited posts here. No doubt, also typos. Fortunately, I've had the presence of mind to capture these pages as they've generated so as to know prior and post edits.  Also fortunate for my computer, I have RMA on ignore so those documents are half as long as they otherwise would be. It's also hard not to read his Maxwell's attacks as rhetorical attempts to put me on the defensive and poison the well for any response I make that doesn't comport with his fabricated version of events. Making demands then avoiding similar requests made of him also raises suspicion about his motives at this point. It's been rather ugly, but at least the CIA isn't involved.

[entalmighty1]

13 minutes ago, DavidTheDavid said:

Well, we don't know that he actually contacted a detective. What smacks of duplicity to me is the initial editing of a PM when he learned that I had a time-stamped receipt from the office almost 30 minutes prior to his balking at the return, then passing off the edit as a "typo." Then he's edited posts here. No doubt, also typos. Fortunately, I've had the presence of mind to capture these pages as they've generated so as to know prior and post edits.  Also fortunate for my computer, I have RMA on ignore so those documents are half as long as they otherwise would be. It's also hard not to read his Maxwell's attacks as rhetorical attempts to put me on the defensive and poison the well for any response I make that doesn't comport with his fabricated version of events. Making demands then avoiding similar requests made of him also raises suspicion about his motives at this point. It's been rather ugly, but at least the CIA isn't involved.

Yet.

[bababooey]

Is either party interested in a path to arbitrate this?

The Current Scenario: parties are in disagreement, the book is with the original seller, both parties feel the book is worth less than the original $1500 value but both parties agreed it was worth $1500 recently.  The original seller has the book & the funds are in dispute with PayPal (in the original seller's account)

I propose that both the buyer and seller submit bids for the book to a third party board member via PM, the party with the higher bid gets the book and the arbitration figure or settlement is the lesser of:
a) the difference between his bid and the original price
b) the difference between his bid and the bid of the other party 

So whoever bids highest wins the book and the settlement is used to roll back the original purchase price to determine the new value of the book.
If the original buyer wins, he gets the book sent back (3rd party?) and the settlement amount comes off his original purchase price in the form of a voluntary refund from the seller.  New value of the book represents purchase price paid.
If the original seller wins, he keeps the book and the settlement amount is deducted from the original purchase price to determine the amount of the refund to the original buyer.  New value for the book is refunded to buy it back.

There's really no relevance when it comes to the "bid-gap" if that ends up determining the settlement amount other than the fact that both parties had a role in determining it.

 

Edited June 29, 2017 by bababooey

[joeypost]

If it matters to the participants in this transaction, I am offering my services to get the condition of this book back (or as close as can be) to its original condition.

 

Edit: At no cost.

Edited June 29, 2017 by joeypost

[Mxwll Smrt]

35 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Is either party interested in a path to arbitrate this?

The Current Scenario: parties are in disagreement, the book is with the original seller, both parties feel the book is worth less than the original $1500 value but both parties agreed it was worth $1500 recently.  The original seller has the book & the funds are in dispute with PayPal (in the original seller's account)

I propose that both the buyer and seller submit bids for the book to a third party board member via PM, the party with the higher bid gets the book and the arbitration figure or settlement is the lesser of:
a) the difference between his bid and the original price
b) the difference between his bid and the bid of the other party 

So whoever bids highest wins the book and the settlement is used to roll back the original purchase price to determine the new value of the book.
If the original buyer wins, he gets the book sent back (3rd party?) and the settlement amount comes off his original purchase price in the form of a voluntary refund from the seller.  New value of the book represents purchase price paid.
If the original seller wins, he keeps the book and the settlement amount is deducted from the original purchase price to determine the amount of the refund to the original buyer.  New value for the book is refunded to buy it back.

There's really no relevance when it comes to the "bid-gap" if that ends up determining the settlement amount other than the fact that both parties had a role in determining it.

 

I would gladly buy the book back at a price that accounts for the price difference between an 8.5 and a 7.5 - Joey commented that there was a 1 point difference. My intent was always to buy back the book at that price point - but I needed to first make sure there's no additional damage to the book.

Edited June 29, 2017 by Mxwll Smrt
Joey didn't suggest anything other than 1 point difference.

[Mxwll Smrt]

1 minute ago, joeypost said:

If it matters to the participants in this transaction, I am offering my services to get the condition of this book back (or as close as can be) to its original condition.

I just responded to the note.

[Mxwll Smrt]

1 hour ago, DavidTheDavid said:

Well, we don't know that he actually contacted a detective. What smacks of duplicity to me is the initial editing of a PM when he learned that I had a time-stamped receipt from the office almost 30 minutes prior to his balking at the return, then passing off the edit as a "typo." Then he's edited posts here. No doubt, also typos. Fortunately, I've had the presence of mind to capture these pages as they've generated so as to know prior and post edits.  Also fortunate for my computer, I have RMA on ignore so those documents are half as long as they otherwise would be. It's also hard not to read his Maxwell's attacks as rhetorical attempts to put me on the defensive and poison the well for any response I make that doesn't comport with his fabricated version of events. Making demands then avoiding similar requests made of him also raises suspicion about his motives at this point. It's been rather ugly, but at least the CIA isn't involved.

I was at the Police Department. Now, as to everything else, please show this mysterious edit -and it's not a balk - it's more that I realized there's an hour time difference and my math in its submission and the post's content were too late to even get in what I wanted to say. You had already got it in the mail. What's funny is you were quicker on getting it out than reading the words "buy back". 

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, Red84 said:

Under your system, lack of due diligence on the part of the buyer makes him responsible for all undiscovered damage and absolves the seller fully.  That's quite a harsh punishment.

Based on your analysis a buyer would be out of luck in the following scenario.  Seller sells a book to buyer.  Buyer receives the book and notifies the seller that it looks great.  The front and back cover are glossy and look phenomenal.  All the pages are present.  The next week the buyer is reading the book and notices a small coupon towards the spine of the book is cut out.  He didn't notice this during his page count because he was merely counting the pages from the edge rather than opening the book flat.  

Based on your analysis, the buyer would not be entitled to any recourse.  That may be.  But any seller on the forum with any integrity would right that wrong immediately.  He wouldn't say, you snooze you lose.

Something should have been worked out here rather than insinuation of fraud and misdeeds.

Your example isn't valid. As comix4fun explained earlier, there wasn't any hidden defect that wasn't immediately discoverable. Here, I'll let the man speak for himself:

Quote

In this situation you didn't have any hidden resto issues, you didn't have any hidden automobile defects that could not be discovered immediately upon driving off the lot, you made an unqualified statement that you'd looked over the book, determined it to be gorgeous and voicing your unreserved happiness with the deal. If the defect was there when the seller sold it to you, then the defect was right there, on the cover that looked so "fresh", when you sent that PM. Nothing hidden, nothing that broke later, just something you missed and accepted. That was an error on your part.  It's called "waiver". Had you couched your happiness with "at a quick glance" or " haven't had a chance to really look at the book, however..." it might be a different story. 

Your example, describing a hidden defect, is not what occurred here.

And no, I didn't say it absolves the seller fully...merely that the buyer has a greater degree of responsibility here than in a normal situation, such as the one you describe.

Because of the details of this case, I think the buyer should be responsible for the difference in value. We're only taking the buyer at his word; regardless of how "stellar" the buyer's reputation has been, the reality is, the seller represented the item in a certain condition, had other people who can vouch for the condition of the item, and 

It is my contention...and again, not a lawyer, here, but that doesn't invalidate anyone...is that, specifically because the buyer told the seller he was satisfied, and gave every indication that the transaction was successfully completed...with the extenuating circumstance that the buyer ADMITTED (bet he wishes he didn't) that there was cause for concern that he ACTIVELY IGNORED...then the buyer has responsibility for the change in value.

No one is saying "you snooze, you lose." What is being said is "you don't do your due diligence, and instead give every indication that the transaction has been concluded satisfactorily, you lose."

I am certain, though no one can prove this, that the book was damaged in shipping, "no damage to the box" notwithstanding. I don't think the buyer damaged the book, and I certainly don't think the seller did, either. However...no USPS investigator worth his/her salt would allow a claim on the USPS when a recipient had the item in their possession...opened...for a week, after indicating that the item had been received in satisfactory condition.

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, DavidTheDavid said:

Well, we don't know that he actually contacted a detective. What smacks of duplicity to me is the initial editing of a PM when he learned that I had a time-stamped receipt from the office almost 30 minutes prior to his balking at the return, then passing off the edit as a "typo." Then he's edited posts here. No doubt, also typos. Fortunately, I've had the presence of mind to capture these pages as they've generated so as to know prior and post edits.  Also fortunate for my computer, I have RMA on ignore so those documents are half as long as they otherwise would be. It's also hard not to read his Maxwell's attacks as rhetorical attempts to put me on the defensive and poison the well for any response I make that doesn't comport with his fabricated version of events. Making demands then avoiding similar requests made of him also raises suspicion about his motives at this point. It's been rather ugly, but at least the CIA isn't involved.

I am not related to this case in any way, and negative personal comments about me aren't relevant, other than demonstrating the nature and character of the buyer.

The buyer has refused to answer simple, straightforward questions, refused to admit any responsibility, refused to be conciliatory in any way, and instead has been hostile, defensive, and dismissive. 

That really says what needs to be said.

I will point out again: the buyer EXCLUDED material information in his Paypal claim (that is, that he initially told the buyer he was satisfied, despite admitting he had misgivings from the outset, and then changed his mind upon "further review", which shouldn't have been necessary if the transaction was already successfully concluded), which would likely have had an impact on their decision. That rises to the level of fraud in my mind, and makes the buyer eligible for the PL.

Along with that, it would behoove anyone...especially with the board's new format...to quote posts made by others, so that after-the-fact edits can't be made without the ability to be checked. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

14 minutes ago, Mxwll Smrt said:

I would gladly buy the book back at a price that accounts for the price difference between an 8.5 and a 7.5 - and that's what Joey suggested. His thought was that it was about a full point difference. My intent was always to buy back the book at that price point - but I needed to first make sure there's no additional damage to the book.

I agree, for your protection. The buyer shows no signs of a willingness to accept any responsibility for his negligence, so I think this is the best course for you.

[Red84]

3 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

21 minutes ago, Mxwll Smrt said:

I would gladly buy the book back at a price that accounts for the price difference between an 8.5 and a 7.5 - and that's what Joey suggested. His thought was that it was about a full point difference. My intent was always to buy back the book at that price point - but I needed to first make sure there's no additional damage to the book.

I agree, for your protection. The buyer shows no signs of a willingness to accept any responsibility for his negligence, so I think this is the best course for you.

 

13 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

I am certain, though no one can prove this, that the book was damaged in shipping, "no damage to the box" notwithstanding. I don't think the buyer damaged the book, and I certainly don't think the seller did, either. However...no USPS investigator worth his/her salt would allow a claim on the USPS when a recipient had the item in their possession...opened...for a week, after indicating that the item had been received in satisfactory condition.

Those 2 statements do not mesh.  You say the buyer needs to be held accountable for his "negligence" and yet you think the book was damaged in the mail.  If you think the book was damaged in the mail then the buyer never received what he paid for.  

15 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Your example, describing a hidden defect, is not what occurred here.

And no, I didn't say it absolves the seller fully...merely that the buyer has a greater degree of responsibility here than in a normal situation, such as the one you describe.

Part of the damage was to the back cover.  That is not something that would  be readily apparent if the buyer merely checked the book in the bag to confirm its receipt and give it a cursory glance.

[Mxwll Smrt]

1 minute ago, Red84 said:

 

Those 2 statements do not mesh.  You say the buyer needs to be held accountable for his "negligence" and yet you think the book was damaged in the mail.  If you think the book was damaged in the mail then the buyer never received what he paid for.  

Please try not to be so literal here. RMA gave DTD an out. DTD stated there was no issue with the box/ mailing. I accused DTD of damaging the book and DTD accused me of mailing a damaged book.

1 minute ago, Red84 said:

Part of the damage was to the back cover.  That is not something that would  be readily apparent if the buyer merely checked the book in the bag to confirm its receipt and give it a cursory glance.

No, but there are a few things that will be of interest. 1. The book was mailed in a mylar with a backing board and then placed in a holder with an additional board. The CGC label from the cracked out  holder was placed on the backside of the backing board. DTD has this entire conversation failed to describe how it was received/ packaged and couldn't remember when asked. 2. A book that's been damaged while being shipped will have the corner of the backing board show stress - in the same area as the crease can be found...if the materials are different than how it was shipped I will be the first to call DTD out. If the book's board shows crease than we know that the damage could have occurred in the mail. Maybe Joey feels like addressing this as well. What we do know is when DTD was given a chance to describe how the book arrived he couldn't remember....he could remember glancing at the FC and thinking no biggie but the other stuff....

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 minute ago, Red84 said:

 

Those 2 statements do not mesh.  You say the buyer needs to be held accountable for his "negligence" and yet you think the book was damaged in the mail.  If you think the book was damaged in the mail then the buyer never received what he paid for.  

 

I've already addressed this. 

The buyer had (and may still have!) the right to initiate a claim with the USPS, provided he/she did his due diligence. 

The buyer's negligence wasn't involving damage to the book, but rather, letting the seller know that the transaction was concluded to his satisfaction BEFORE checking the item thoroughly, and WITH misgivings about the item's condition. 

The buyer did NOT do his due diligence, and a claim with the USPS may not be (probably is not) possible. If it IS possible, the buyer should pursue it, at his cost (in terms of time.) I'm sure the seller would be amenable to helping him with the claim. However...if I were the USPS investigator assigned to the claim, I would disallow it, on the grounds that the buyer sufficiently and substantially expressed satisfaction with the item upon receipt, despite personal misgivings, which concluded the transaction.

8 minutes ago, Red84 said:

Part of the damage was to the back cover.  That is not something that would  be readily apparent if the buyer merely checked the book in the bag to confirm its receipt and give it a cursory glance.

This isn't relevant. The buyer didn't say he had given it a "cursory glance." He indicated his satisfaction with the item, and then, to seal the deal, left kudos. 

If the buyer wasn't satisfied...or had misgivings about the book...he should have done neither of those things. As comix4fun pointed out...who IS a lawyer...

Quote

In this situation you didn't have any hidden resto issues, you didn't have any hidden automobile defects that could not be discovered immediately upon driving off the lot, you made an unqualified statement that you'd looked over the book, determined it to be gorgeous and voicing your unreserved happiness with the deal. If the defect was there when the seller sold it to you, then the defect was right there, on the cover that looked so "fresh", when you sent that PM. Nothing hidden, nothing that broke later, just something you missed and accepted. That was an error on your part.  It's called "waiver". Had you couched your happiness with "at a quick glance" or " haven't had a chance to really look at the book, however..." it might be a different story. 

I don't think anyone here thinks "merely checking the book in the bag" constitutes "due diligence" on the part of a buyer. I doubt ANYONE would allow that as grounds for having confirmed the condition of the item upon receipt.

[Red84]

2 minutes ago, Mxwll Smrt said:

No, but there are a few things that will be of interest. 1. The book was mailed in a mylar with a backing board and then placed in a holder with an additional board. The CGC label from the cracked out  holder was placed on the backside of the backing board. DTD has this entire conversation failed to describe how it was received/ packaged and couldn't remember when asked. 2. A book that's been damaged while being shipped will have the corner of the backing board show stress - in the same area as the crease can be found...if the materials are different than how it was shipped I will be the first to call DTD out. If the book's board shows crease than we know that the damage could have occurred in the mail. Maybe Joey feels like addressing this as well. What we do know is when DTD was given a chance to describe how the book arrived he couldn't remember....he could remember glancing at the FC and thinking no biggie but the other stuff....

Joey has already mentioned that a book can be damaged through SCS without any damage to the packing material.  This can occur if the book is able to move within the bag.  A lack of damage to the box does not eliminate the possibility of damage during shipping.

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 minutes ago, Mxwll Smrt said:

Please try not to be so literal here. RMA gave DTD an out. DTD stated there was no issue with the box/ mailing. I accused DTD of damaging the book and DTD accused me of mailing a damaged book.

No, but there are a few things that will be of interest. 1. The book was mailed in a mylar with a backing board and then placed in a holder with an additional board. The CGC label from the cracked out  holder was placed on the backside of the backing board. DTD has this entire conversation failed to describe how it was received/ packaged and couldn't remember when asked. 2. A book that's been damaged while being shipped will have the corner of the backing board show stress - in the same area as the crease can be found...if the materials are different than how it was shipped I will be the first to call DTD out. If the book's board shows crease than we know that the damage could have occurred in the mail. Maybe Joey feels like addressing this as well. What we do know is when DTD was given a chance to describe how the book arrived he couldn't remember....he could remember glancing at the FC and thinking no biggie but the other stuff....

The fact that he couldn't remember is more evidence of his carelessness.

When I receive a book...especially a high value book...but really, any book (and this should come as no shock to anyone reading this who has been around for more than a few months), I forensically examine it, matching up any sort of damage to the bag/board situation, to see if any shipment damage occurred (and it occurs a lot.)

It's not reasonable to expect a forensic examination from everyone, but..and here's the kicker...if the buyer sees something...anything...that gives him pause, he should stop what he's doing and conduct a thorough examination immediately. he should certainly not ignore it, unless he is willing to accept responsibility for it later.

That's the very meaning of "due diligence."

[Red84]

10 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

If the buyer wasn't satisfied...or had misgivings about the book...he should have done neither of those things. As comix4fun pointed out...who IS a lawyer...

Quote

In this situation you didn't have any hidden resto issues, you didn't have any hidden automobile defects that could not be discovered immediately upon driving off the lot, you made an unqualified statement that you'd looked over the book, determined it to be gorgeous and voicing your unreserved happiness with the deal. If the defect was there when the seller sold it to you, then the defect was right there, on the cover that looked so "fresh", when you sent that PM. Nothing hidden, nothing that broke later, just something you missed and accepted. That was an error on your part.  It's called "waiver". Had you couched your happiness with "at a quick glance" or " haven't had a chance to really look at the book, however..." it might be a different story. 

I don't think anyone here thinks "merely checking the book in the bag" constitutes "due diligence" on the part of a buyer. I doubt ANYONE would allow that as grounds for having confirmed the condition of the item upon receipt.

Since we're going the credentials route, I am also a lawyer. lol.  Comix4Fun was not giving a legal analysis of the situation and neither am I.  Buyer missed the damage when he initially looked at the book and confirmed the condition.  I do not believe that would constitute a waiver to the point of absolving the seller of responsibility if the book did indeed arrive damaged.

What most things come down to is reasonableness and reasonableness is very subjective.

 

Edited June 29, 2017 by Red84

[comix4fun]

Just now, Red84 said:

Since we're going the credentials route, I am also a lawyer. lol.  Comix4Fun was not giving a legal analysis of the situation and neither am I.  Buyer missed the damage when he initially looked at the book and confirmed the condition.  I do not believe that would constitute a waiver to the point of absolving the seller of responsibility if the book did indeed arrive damaged.

 

 

They no give me a check-y they no getta my service-y.

I believed it was only waiver as far as the damage was not hidden and freely and easily able to be discovered, had it existed upon opening the package, through routine examination as is common in the hobby. 

If it had been restoration, internal defect, or otherwise obfuscated and a defect only able to be discovered upon more in depth or detailed examination then it would be something more easily excusable on the buyer's part.