BSeldin305

Because knowledge is power....

"I put it through CBCS to avoid the "Qualified" note on the label for Mr. Trimpe's (RIP) signature after getting it signed by Steve McNiven and remarked by Dexter Vines."  This line was your clue.  I'm really sorry it went over your head.

Yes, I have the receipt.  

I received a nice call from Steve Borock Friday night.  He is confident they will track down the book and has already begun to make things right. 

We'll hope for the best.   

10 minutes ago, comicquant said:

Will the reimburse you for any of the cost?

We will see...

Well folks, CBCS has LOST my book.

The last few months I have been calling to get a status of 1 Book, dropped off personally at the CBCS booth for 2 ASP & 1 VSP & Press at a Florida SuperCon on July 6, 2019.

After being ignored for months, I escalated the situation in the last week. I received this message today from CBCS:

"Hi Bradley,

We have checked with our pressing and receiving departments and we never physically ever received your book. The only thing we received was the white copy of the paperwork."

Of course, I have my receipt and a picture of the book on the CBCS grading table. 

I put it through CBCS to avoid the "Qualified" note on the label for Mr. Trimpe's (RIP) signature after getting it signed by Steve McNiven and remarked by Dexter Vines.  

Thought y'all should know. 

I'll be there!  Prob all 4 days. 

58 minutes ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

If this guy was "reporting posts" across the street...

Does that mean he was reporting them here too?

 

One of his "positions" was that he correctly determined the book as unrestored, and CGC got it wrong.  I don't think they take kindly to that.  

7 hours ago, James J Johnson said:

Change around here can only be for the worse. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. How can you improve on perfection?

"The enemy of good is better"

FWIW Cornfield was just suspended on the CBCS message board. (I have learned that I am prohibited from linking to it.)

"06-12-2019 cornfieldcomics 7 day suspension for spamming the "report comment" account with numerous comments that do not violate forum rules. He needlessly reported excessive amounts of posts and in consideration of that, the standard suspension guideline was deviated from."

6 minutes ago, James J Johnson said:

At any rate, there's an upside. This whole experience bought you a ticket! A Rite of passage. You're one of us now, like it or not.

I even had my first post removed by a moderator.... (where I posted eBay conversation regarding the refund). 

3 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

You are amusing. I hope you have more problems with people sending you books so you stick around. 

You are not amusing.  Your comments have been worthless.  Have a great life in Long Island.   

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.  

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.  

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!

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.... 

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.  

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.  

1 minute ago, kav said:

If he messaged you agreeing to the $300 refund, that would constitute a written contract, a written contract cannot be superseded by a verbal contract so I'm a bit confused about the verbal contract statement.

You would argue both written and verbal contract.  (one in the alternative)   h/t

1 minute ago, kav said:

You have to use your own wits though-if a seller says unrestored you should say 'maybe'.   

Agreed, but that doesn't get him off the hook.

35 minutes ago, kav said:

One party should not have carte blanche to profit and impose the risk on another party.  If it comes back good, I sell for more.  If it comes back with resto, I get full refund plus grading fees.  Yippee for me!!  Too bad for seller

I recognize there is risk.  But going back to puffing- there is a difference between saying "this book is unrestored" and "this book APPEARS unrestored to me".  The former is a specific representation (which is what happened here) versus the latter which is puffing.  

This seller is still listing 8 books as "unrestored" in the title.  I think its wrong.  

2 minutes ago, kav said:

Verbal contract?

Both written contracts and oral contracts are recognized under the law.  

1 hour ago, Buzzetta said:

Go back and quote what I edited in.  His “strong” case is weak and dependent on words on a message board. 

Buzz who is for some reason stuck in Jamaica even though this train doesn’t stop in Jamaica. 

1 hour ago, Buzzetta said:

Fixed that for you.

You “think” you have a strong lawsuit over $100.  If the guy dodged you for $100 and a court actually feels like entertaining you he is dodging that as well. 

You have words on a message board.  You don’t know who exactly you are talking to. You don’t know if there was a typo from 3 to 2.  You don’t have a strong anything.  Your case is actually pretty weak. 

And even so... I have watched people dodge bigger things than $100 and some people are still seeking action. 

 

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. 

If I have in writing he will send $300, and then he sends $200, I have a very strong lawsuit for breach of contract- and possible fraud as well with an award of attorney's fees possible. 

But I never threatened legal action - I just want to make sure we were on the same page.  And we were not.  

14 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

He could state anything he wants in some thread.  No one cares.  There is nothing binding in this thread that anyone would ever pay attention to. 

There are 11 pages worth of comments that show folks care.  The point was to put the community on notice about this seller; if you don't care about that, that's up to you. 

3 minutes ago, Bird said:

they just don't like each other at this point. Buyer wanted refund prior to returning the book. Seller said send it back and I will refund you then. Buyer said "say it in these words" and I will. Seller said "I said I would refund but I won't say exactly what you want me to say" but I will refund what you paid. Seller gave professional info in case of issue with refund to prove intentions. 2 stubborn people with no trust.

Dude- I am the lawyer and I gave the info about MY bar memberships for the additional recourse.  I am the buyer who bought a book listed in the title as unrestored when it fact it was restored (trimmed).