eBay Seller cornfieldcomics-and-bricks BEWARE 3 3

[BSeldin305]

1 minute ago, kav said:

You cant have both a written and a verbal contract.  If you have a written contract, that nullifies any verbal contracts.

You argue 1) I have a written contract 2) in the alternative, if i dont have a written contract I have a verbal/ oral one.  So you are correct, but you argue in the alternative so if one fails you have the other.  

[kav]

Just now, BSeldin305 said:

You argue 1) I have a written contract 2) in the alternative, if i dont have a written contract I have a verbal/ oral one.  So you are correct, but you argue in the alternative so if one fails you have the other.  

interesting.

[kav]

So you have actually spoken to the guy?

[BSeldin305]

7 minutes ago, kav said:

Well it does in regards to a partial refund for pressing and slabbing

I never really disagreed with this.  I never asked to be reimbursed for the slabbing.  What I won't do is now send him the pressed case book for only a $200 refund at this point.  Then he gets the book back and $100? I can't abide.  

 

Edited June 10, 2019 by BSeldin305

[kav]

1 minute ago, BSeldin305 said:

I never really disagreed with this.  I never asked to be reimbursed for the slabbing.  What I won't do is now send him the pressed case book for only a $200 refund at this point.  Then he gets the book back and $100? I can't abide.  

 

At this point you would be a fool to send the book back no matter what he says.  He's shown his true colors.

[kav]

Watch him now show up and say "I'll refund $300 when I get the book back!"
Now that he knows there's no chance of that.   

[kav]

-or at least he would have if I hadnt pre empted that ploy  

[1Cool]

24 minutes ago, BSeldin305 said:

I never really disagreed with this.  I never asked to be reimbursed for the slabbing.  What I won't do is now send him the pressed case book for only a $200 refund at this point.  Then he gets the book back and $100? I can't abide.  

 

But haven’t you at this point gotten what you were going to be at least content to get.  You asked him for a $100 refund which you got (all be it from Paypal).  Your thread is definetely a smudge on his name so he doesn’t get away scott free.  I’d say it may be time to just move on and mark it up as a learning experience.

[Peoplesjim]

Are sending the book back or not? I told you, I would refund your eBay purchase price. 

You have to add about being a lawyer and exact wording. 

If you want the refund send the book back.

 

[BSeldin305]

1 minute ago, 1Cool said:

But haven’t you at this point gotten what you were going to be at least content to get.  You asked him for a $100 refund which you got (all be it from Paypal).  Your thread is definetely a smudge on his name so he doesn’t get away scott free.  I’d say it may be time to just move on and mark it up as a learning experience.

Again, it was about letting the community know.  It took off from there.... 

[BSeldin305]

25 minutes ago, kav said:

Watch him now show up and say "I'll refund $300 when I get the book back!"
Now that he knows there's no chance of that.   

 

21 minutes ago, kav said:

-or at least he would have if I hadnt pre empted that ploy  

Go play the lotto today bud!

[kav]

1 minute ago, Peoplesjim said:

Are sending the book back or not? I told you, I would refund your eBay purchase price. 

You have to add about being a lawyer and exact wording. 

If you want the refund send the book back.

 

AM I PSYCHIC OR WHAT???????????????????????

[Crops068]

3 minutes ago, kav said:

AM I PSYCHO OR WHAT???????????????????????

Fixed it for you.

31 minutes ago, kav said:

Watch him now show up and say "I'll refund $300 when I get the book back!"
Now that he knows there's no chance of that.   

I absolutely agree at this point with all the back and forth, while I agree with you wanting him to say exactly the price he was going to refund you, he still hasn't said the numbers.  I would keep it and if you are not happy with it sell it yourself and put that money towards another that isn't restored (hopefully).

[kav]

1 minute ago, Crops068 said:

6 minutes ago, kav said:

AM I PSYCHO OR WHAT???????????????????????

Fixed it for you.

 

[Buzzetta]

2 hours ago, BSeldin305 said:

 

As a lawyer/ litigator licensed to practice in 3 jurisdictions I am paid to think about these things. 

I feel comfortable that in a lawsuit where the seller advertised an UNRESTORED book, that was revealed to be RESTORED, and he AGREED in writing to send back $300 following return of the book but does not- that is an enforceable verbal contract- an exchange of promises and he would be liable for, at a minimum, the extra $100 plus court costs. FYI, these were promises made in a back and forth ebay message conversation - not a message board.  They would have been specific statements directed to me that I was intended to rely on. 

Now whether or not I could collect on a judgment, whether its wise to start a lawsuit over $100, etc.  are fair points and issues that may make a lawsuit ultimately not worth it. 

I applaud your education and your accomplishments.  I am shrugging right now. 

I stand by what I said.  Take it to court... but please do so with some type of recording device as I enjoy listening to people laughing at others. 

"Someone" wrote something.  Again.  It could have been a typo.  It could be a different person.  You pursue your little thing.  I think that's cute. 

As you said, "whether it's wise to start a lawsuit over $100, etc.  are fair points and issues that may make a lawsuit ultimately not worth it." 

 

Edited June 11, 2019 by Buzzetta

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, BSeldin305 said:

I recognize there is risk. 

The Uniform Commercial Code, and commerce law throughout the US, and probably the Western world, does not allow misrepresentation of goods for sale in order to induce purchase. It's just not allowed. A seller is not allowed to misrepresent their item, and then turn around to the buyer and expect them to shoulder a single jot of responsibility (aka "risk") for the seller misrepresenting their merchandise, either negligently or on purpose.

Buyers ought to be cautious, always...but they do not share any of the "risk" involved in accurately representing goods for sale. As well, the buyer has the legal right to:

1. Inspect the goods

2. Reject for non-conformance ("not as described.")

3. Revoke acceptance at a later time, if non-conformance is discovered that was difficult to detect, or based on assurances from the seller. Both apply in this case.

4. Pass the cost of inspection to the seller if the goods are rejected for non-conformance (if my interpretation of Section 2-513 (2) is correct.)

The default condition of all comic books is "unrestored." Therefore, a restored comic book is defective, it is not normal wear and tear, and restoration not disclosed...whether negligently or on purpose...is non-conformance, for which the buyer can reject. 

This is not unclear, and anyone arguing that the buyer shares any of the risk involved with regards to representation or inspection is not aligned with the law in this matter.

2 hours ago, BSeldin305 said:

"this book APPEARS unrestored to me".  The former is a specific representation (which is what happened here) versus the latter which is puffing.  

Even if the seller says that, it doesn't relieve them of responsibility for non-conformance. "I don't know", as I'm sure you know, doesn't relieve obligation or pass the risk to the buyer. The right to reject and pass inspection costs to the seller for non-conformance has nothing to do with whatever a buyer may or may not do with goods after they are purchased. If a seller misrepresents...the seller eats it. Always.

[BSeldin305]

30 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

I applaud your education and your accomplishments.  I am shrugging right now. 

I stand by what I said.  Take it to court... but please do so with some type of recording device as I enjoy listening to people laughing at others. 

"Someone" wrote something.  Again.  It could have been a typo.  It could be a different person.  You pursue your little thing.  I think that's cute. 

Sick take down!  You are probably great at twitter.  

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

7 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

"I don't know", as I'm sure you know, doesn't relieve obligation or pass the risk to the buyer.

The only exception being, of course, in an "as is" transaction, where the seller specifically disclaims liability for faults in the item...which isn't allowed on eBay, both by regulation and policy (the buyer can't inspect prior to purchase), which makes it moot. And even in "as is" transactions, the seller still cannot MISrepresent the item for sale and then turn around and say "sorry, dude, as is! Doesn't matter if I told you it was brand new and had never been used, you bought it as is!"

[Buzzetta]

6 minutes ago, BSeldin305 said:

Sick take down!  You are probably great at twitter.  

 

Just slightly better than you must apparently be in the courtroom. 

You left yourself open for that one

This is becoming fun though.  I mean it. I'm not even typing with disdain for you. This is sheer amusement. 

Edited June 11, 2019 by Buzzetta

[BSeldin305]

1 minute ago, Buzzetta said:

Just slightly better than you must apparently be in the courtroom. 

You left yourself open for that one

Believe me, I'm happier on my beach than you are on yours.