PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[rodan57]

As a collector first, if I sold it, I'd take it back.

 

It wasn't the book that I claimed that I was selling.

 

A year is awhile but it's not a lifetime.

 

I'd rather my reputation lasted a lifetime -- and not a deal gone sour through no one's fault.

 

 

[wombat]

I am in no way saying this happened. But it made me think of an odd scenario. Someone could buy a book and say it came back with resto from CGC. They could have had that all along and claim it was the book they bought here. Has there ever been shenanigans like that here that anyone knows of?

 

Again, I am in no way trying to imply that happened in this case.

[crassus]

I don't want to think he did it maliciously at all.. but over the course of a year of reading my PM's on the subject and not answering makes me wonder.

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

Is this the same type of problem that landed him on the probation list the first time?

 

something like this was going through my mind also...

[EC ed]

As a collector first, if I sold it, I'd take it back.

 

It wasn't the book that I claimed that I was selling.

 

A year is awhile but it's not a lifetime.

 

I'd rather my reputation lasted a lifetime -- and not a deal gone sour through no one's fault.

 

 

Hard to argue with that.

 

However, the issue on the table here in this thread is whether this is PL worthy.

 

No stated restoration guarantee or return/refund policy in that sales thread. What, precisely, is the grounds for PL nomination? That the transaction was not completed as agreed?

[Ryan.]

I took a book back after two years due to undisclosed micro trimming. I missed it and the buyer missed it but I still bought the book back. Shib happens.

[CAHokie]

The time period is what I am having trouble with. How much time is acceptable to discover a problem and seek reimbursement on the boards or be subject to the PL? Again, if it was me I would make it right, but do all sales now come with a lifetime guarantee of no restoration? If he has been on the PL before for something similar though, that would be a cause for concern.

[Boba]

I finally heard from him and he had a perfectly plausible story for why this happened.

However until he follows through with his promise to pay me on Monday, that's all it is is a story.

 

I would be very curious what explains away lying to someone repeatedly. Can't think of any myself.

 

He assures me it is all true. I told him that putting a check in a box without telling someone is a block-headed move, but that even I make block-headed mistakes.

But saying you're going to do something and not, repeatedly is where I draw the line.

We'll see what happens Monday.

 

[wombat]

I finally heard from him and he had a perfectly plausible story for why this happened.

However until he follows through with his promise to pay me on Monday, that's all it is is a story.

 

I would be very curious what explains away lying to someone repeatedly. Can't think of any myself.

 

He assures me it is all true. I told him that putting a check in a box without telling someone is a block-headed move, but that even I make block-headed mistakes.

But saying you're going to do something and not, repeatedly is where I draw the line.

We'll see what happens Monday.

 

So the times he said he was going to send paypal and didn't? Does the story involve alien abductions? Is there a reason he isn't sending the money today?

 

You are way more forgiving than I would be. But maybe that's a good thing.

[crassus]

The time period is what I am having trouble with. How much time is acceptable to discover a problem and seek reimbursement on the boards or be subject to the PL? Again, if it was me I would make it right, but do all sales now come with a lifetime guarantee of no restoration? If he has been on the PL before for something similar though, that would be a cause for concern.

 

This is a fair objection, but what makes resto so difficult is that it is often not self-evident and usually requires professional consultation to detect, so its time consuming and not the same as noticing whether a book is complete, or has writing, or has a detached cf or something. I agree that lifetime guarantees are not realistic, but resto detection seems to require at least a longer timeline.

 

 

 

[Sqeggs]

As a collector first, if I sold it, I'd take it back.

 

It wasn't the book that I claimed that I was selling.

 

A year is awhile but it's not a lifetime.

 

I'd rather my reputation lasted a lifetime -- and not a deal gone sour through no one's fault.

 

 

Hard to argue with that.

 

However, the issue on the table here in this thread is whether this is PL worthy.

 

No stated restoration guarantee or return/refund policy in that sales thread. What, precisely, is the grounds for PL nomination? That the transaction was not completed as agreed?

 

I'm with Rodan on what I would do as the seller in this situation.

 

I'm on the fence about the PLworthiness. I have to disagree with Ed, though, about the relevance of whether there is a stated restoration guarantee or return/refund policy.

 

Don't we assume that books are unrestored unless the seller states that they are? And don't we assume that the seller will refund the buyer's money if there is undisclosed resto? If the purchase had been made last week and Rupp had recognized right away that the cover was married, then the seller's refusal to take the book back would be PL worthy, wouldn't it?

[Boba]

I finally heard from him and he had a perfectly plausible story for why this happened.

However until he follows through with his promise to pay me on Monday, that's all it is is a story.

 

I would be very curious what explains away lying to someone repeatedly. Can't think of any myself.

 

He assures me it is all true. I told him that putting a check in a box without telling someone is a block-headed move, but that even I make block-headed mistakes.

But saying you're going to do something and not, repeatedly is where I draw the line.

We'll see what happens Monday.

 

So the times he said he was going to send paypal and didn't? Does the story involve alien abductions? Is there a reason he isn't sending the money today?

 

You are way more forgiving than I would be. But maybe that's a good thing.

 

[Sqeggs]

I finally heard from him and he had a perfectly plausible story for why this happened.

However until he follows through with his promise to pay me on Monday, that's all it is is a story.

 

I would be very curious what explains away lying to someone repeatedly. Can't think of any myself.

 

He assures me it is all true. I told him that putting a check in a box without telling someone is a block-headed move, but that even I make block-headed mistakes.

But saying you're going to do something and not, repeatedly is where I draw the line.

We'll see what happens Monday.

 

So the times he said he was going to send paypal and didn't? Does the story involve alien abductions? Is there a reason he isn't sending the money today?

 

You are way more forgiving than I would be. But maybe that's a good thing.

 

 

Wait, if you are Boba, isn't this guy in real trouble if he crosses you?

[crassus]

As a collector first, if I sold it, I'd take it back.

 

It wasn't the book that I claimed that I was selling.

 

A year is awhile but it's not a lifetime.

 

I'd rather my reputation lasted a lifetime -- and not a deal gone sour through no one's fault.

 

 

Hard to argue with that.

 

However, the issue on the table here in this thread is whether this is PL worthy.

 

No stated restoration guarantee or return/refund policy in that sales thread. What, precisely, is the grounds for PL nomination? That the transaction was not completed as agreed?

 

I'm with Rodan on what I would do as the seller in this situation.

 

I'm on the fence about the PLworthiness. I have to disagree with Ed, though, about the relevance of whether there is a stated restoration guarantee or return/refund policy.

 

Don't we assume that books are unrestored unless the seller states that they are? And don't we assume that the seller will refund the buyer's money if there is undisclosed resto? If the purchase had been made last week and Rupp had recognized right away that the cover was married, then the seller's refusal to take the book back would be PL worthy, wouldn't it?

 

I agree completely. The issue seems to be the time lapse.

[Ghost Town]

I finally heard from him and he had a perfectly plausible story for why this happened.

However until he follows through with his promise to pay me on Monday, that's all it is is a story.

 

I would be very curious what explains away lying to someone repeatedly. Can't think of any myself.

 

He assures me it is all true. I told him that putting a check in a box without telling someone is a block-headed move, but that even I make block-headed mistakes.

But saying you're going to do something and not, repeatedly is where I draw the line.

We'll see what happens Monday.

PM sent because I'm curious who this guy is and he's someone to avoid completely.

 

Sure, mistakes happen. But the guy could have fixed the "mistake" in minutes with PayPal. Of course, the guy's behavior makes me think it wasn't a mistake but just pure sleazebaggery.

[Boba]

I finally heard from him and he had a perfectly plausible story for why this happened.

However until he follows through with his promise to pay me on Monday, that's all it is is a story.

 

I would be very curious what explains away lying to someone repeatedly. Can't think of any myself.

 

He assures me it is all true. I told him that putting a check in a box without telling someone is a block-headed move, but that even I make block-headed mistakes.

But saying you're going to do something and not, repeatedly is where I draw the line.

We'll see what happens Monday.

 

So the times he said he was going to send paypal and didn't? Does the story involve alien abductions? Is there a reason he isn't sending the money today?

 

You are way more forgiving than I would be. But maybe that's a good thing.

 

 

Wait, if you are Boba, isn't this guy in real trouble if he crosses you?

He's no good to me dead

[crassus]

[EC ed]

I agree completely. The issue seems to be the time lapse.

 

I also agree completely, gentlemen. My comment about the absence of stated return policies, etc., was indeed made in the context of the time lapse....perhaps that wasn't clear. My point was that in the absence of a more liberal stated policy, I think it's reasonable to assume that one can push for returns/refunds within a "reasonable" time frame for a book that's not as described. My query was essentially whether 13 months is "reasonable" in this context of a PL nomination. Same point others have made.

 

Now, what I personally would do if I were the seller is a different matter. That's not the point.

[thehumantorch]

As a collector first, if I sold it, I'd take it back.

 

It wasn't the book that I claimed that I was selling.

 

A year is awhile but it's not a lifetime.

 

I'd rather my reputation lasted a lifetime -- and not a deal gone sour through no one's fault.

 

 

This is where I'm at. If I misrepresented a book I'll do anything within my power to make the buyer whole. Ethics should never have a best before date.

[Bio-Rupp]

As a collector first, if I sold it, I'd take it back.

 

It wasn't the book that I claimed that I was selling.

 

A year is awhile but it's not a lifetime.

 

I'd rather my reputation lasted a lifetime -- and not a deal gone sour through no one's fault.

 

 

Hard to argue with that.

 

However, the issue on the table here in this thread is whether this is PL worthy.

 

No stated restoration guarantee or return/refund policy in that sales thread. What, precisely, is the grounds for PL nomination? That the transaction was not completed as agreed?

 

I'm with Rodan on what I would do as the seller in this situation.

 

I'm on the fence about the PLworthiness. I have to disagree with Ed, though, about the relevance of whether there is a stated restoration guarantee or return/refund policy.

 

Don't we assume that books are unrestored unless the seller states that they are? And don't we assume that the seller will refund the buyer's money if there is undisclosed resto? If the purchase had been made last week and Rupp had recognized right away that the cover was married, then the seller's refusal to take the book back would be PL worthy, wouldn't it?

 

I agree completely. The issue seems to be the time lapse.

 

The time lapse is an issue with me as well. I realize this had been a while. This is the main reason I don't feel a FULL refund is warranted and only the small amount that I proposed. The fact is I did not get what I paid for. I was sold a book that had no noted repair and no noted restoration. I received a book with a married cover and replaced staples which is not what I agreed to buy.

 

Let's say the million dollar buyer of that Action #1 a few years back decided to reslab his copy today and it came back with restoration this time that was missed (and since this happened with a certain Thor key a year or so ago, we all know this is a VERY possible outcome). Would that guy deserve anything? Or is he just out his cool million?

 

Apples to oranges aside... it would be the same thing, that person did not get what he paid for and it would be within his rights to ask for compensation. I realize that's an extreme scenario, but its in the same vein.

 

The main thing that bothers me is the refusal to answer a YEAR'S worth of PM's that had been read and avoided. That's the sting right there. ONE YEAR of time given to address this issue. Also note it would have been less time involved had the seller just answered the PMs from a year ago

 

 

[cloud cloddie]

 

 

The main thing that bothers me is the refusal to answer a YEAR'S worth of PM's that had been read and avoided. That's the sting right there. ONE YEAR of time given to address this issue. Also note it would have been less time involved had the seller just answered the PMs from a year ago

 

 

I feel this still raises the question of how long the seller is responsible. Looking at his history, he hasn't posted since November '13.

If the issue was brought to him shortly after purchase, it would be more suspect that he didn't respond. But to message him a year after purchase, and 6 months after he stopped posting (with nothing since)...

 

Regardless of whether he should work with you on this, I'm not seeing the probation worthy aspect of it.