PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[miraclemet]

Rules of a transaction and Rules of the Probation List are two different things.

 

For this transaction only you should be able to cancel the deal as of 3/3 when he violated the terms of payment. You should also be able to keep the deposit if that was part of the terms (if it was described as a non-refundable depost). You should be able to relist the books since the deal is dead.

 

 

You arent looking to put him on the PL correct? Just looking to confirm that you can move on?

[ItsJustRyan]

See last post regarding 30-Day rule.

That rule is for adding people to the probation list. My question is, how long do I have to wait, until I can move on with these books?

Gotcha. Thought you were nominating since this is a PL forum. I say move on...

[comicdonna]

I am just looking to move on with these books. I made it real clear, the $70 was to hold the books, as mentioned above.

[I like pie]

I recall something about waiting three days from the time you bring up the issue in the probation thread

[miraclemet]

Well it's your call here.

 

I think you are within your right to cancel the transaction, keep the non-refundable deposit (if that's what it was called) and relist/sell the books.

 

Here's where I think it's your call. If he's been responsive up to this point, and has continually stated that he would pay by 3/3, maybe give him the chance to respond.

 

3/3 was a Sunday. Maybe he got swamped at work, maybe he got sick. If he has been responsive and agreeable up till now, maybe give him thru the weekend to respond.

 

If he's been problematic, evasive or difficult enough that your radar was already expecting this deal to fall thru, cut bait. By the terms of the agreement you are within your right.

[Columbia Comics]

I am just looking to move on with these books. I made it real clear, the $70 was to hold the books, as mentioned above.

 

Sell the books...be done w/it. You've held them long enough.

[skypinkblu]

I recall something about waiting three days from the time you bring up the issue in the probation thread

 

That's 3 days after sending a separate PM to the buyer/seller.

 

Mike, I'd just send him the separate PM, wait the 3 days (unless you sent one already) and move on. The 3 days is fair so that he knows it's over.

 

It's nice of you not to nominate him, but he deserves to be on that list.

[comicdonna]

I recall something about waiting three days from the time you bring up the issue in the probation thread

 

That's 3 days after sending a separate PM to the buyer/seller.

 

Mike, I'd just send him the separate PM, wait the 3 days (unless you sent one already) and move on. The 3 days is fair so that he knows it's over.

 

It's nice of you not to nominate him, but he deserves to be on that list.

The seperate PM was sent this morning. I will give him until Monday.

[miraclemet]

I recall something about waiting three days from the time you bring up the issue in the probation thread

 

That's 3 days after sending a separate PM to the buyer/seller.

 

Mike, I'd just send him the separate PM, wait the 3 days (unless you sent one already) and move on. The 3 days is fair so that he knows it's over.

 

It's nice of you not to nominate him, but he deserves to be on that list.

 

Here's what I always wondered about with time payments vs Probation List.

 

I enter into a contract to buy a book, say for $1000 with a $100 non-refundable deposit, and the balance due in 90 days.

 

I pay the $100 deposit, and then do not make good on the remainder of the balance within the 90 days per the agreement.

 

The seller gets to keep the $100 bucks (as agreed it being a non-refundable deposit), but in doing so haven't we both held up the contract in a sense?

 

The non-refundable deposit is like saying in the contract "if I dont pay off the book, this $100 is not refunded" So the seller is agreeing to the posibility of the book not being paid off, and the $100 penalty being the off-set for that outcome.

 

So as long as the seller gets the $100, then why should the buyer go on the Probation list? S/He fulfilled the contract, just not the best possible outcome of the contract. (In other words, time payments with built in penalties allow for two possible contractual fulfillments: Full payment, or non-payment with a monetary penalty).

 

What are peoples thoughts?

Edited March 8, 2013 by Miraclemet

[Kevin.J]

I recall something about waiting three days from the time you bring up the issue in the probation thread

 

That's 3 days after sending a separate PM to the buyer/seller.

 

Mike, I'd just send him the separate PM, wait the 3 days (unless you sent one already) and move on. The 3 days is fair so that he knows it's over.

 

It's nice of you not to nominate him, but he deserves to be on that list.

 

Here's what I always wondered about with time payments vs Probation List.

 

I enter into a contract to buy a book, say for $1000 with a $100 non-refundable deposit, and the balance due in 90 days.

 

I pay the $100 deposit, and then do not make good on the remainder of the balance within the 90 days per the agreement.

 

The seller gets to keep the $100 bucks (as agreed it being a non-refundable deposit), but in doing so haven't we both held up the contract in a sense?

 

The non-refundable deposit is like saying in the contract "if I dont pay off the book, this $100 is not refunded" So the seller is agreeing to the posibility of the book not being paid off, and the $100 penalty being the off-set for that outcome.

 

So as long as the seller gets the $100, then why should the buyer go on the Probation list? S/He fulfilled the contract, just not the best possible outcome of the contract. (In other words, time payments with built in penalties allow for two possible contractual fulfillments: Full payment, or non-payment with a monetary penalty).

 

What are peoples thoughts?

 

That sounds logical....and fair, however, I do not want to deal with buyers like this and the list is a way to check and remember them for what happened.

[comix4fun]

I recall something about waiting three days from the time you bring up the issue in the probation thread

 

That's 3 days after sending a separate PM to the buyer/seller.

 

Mike, I'd just send him the separate PM, wait the 3 days (unless you sent one already) and move on. The 3 days is fair so that he knows it's over.

 

It's nice of you not to nominate him, but he deserves to be on that list.

The seperate PM was sent this morning. I will give him until Monday.

 

 

Click on his screen name and see if he's posted on the forums since the deadline passed, or since you sent the PMs. That may help you see if it's avoidance or he was actually away.

[miraclemet]

I recall something about waiting three days from the time you bring up the issue in the probation thread

 

That's 3 days after sending a separate PM to the buyer/seller.

 

Mike, I'd just send him the separate PM, wait the 3 days (unless you sent one already) and move on. The 3 days is fair so that he knows it's over.

 

It's nice of you not to nominate him, but he deserves to be on that list.

 

Here's what I always wondered about with time payments vs Probation List.

 

I enter into a contract to buy a book, say for $1000 with a $100 non-refundable deposit, and the balance due in 90 days.

 

I pay the $100 deposit, and then do not make good on the remainder of the balance within the 90 days per the agreement.

 

The seller gets to keep the $100 bucks (as agreed it being a non-refundable deposit), but in doing so haven't we both held up the contract in a sense?

 

The non-refundable deposit is like saying in the contract "if I dont pay off the book, this $100 is not refunded" So the seller is agreeing to the posibility of the book not being paid off, and the $100 penalty being the off-set for that outcome.

 

So as long as the seller gets the $100, then why should the buyer go on the Probation list? S/He fulfilled the contract, just not the best possible outcome of the contract. (In other words, time payments with built in penalties allow for two possible contractual fulfillments: Full payment, or non-payment with a monetary penalty).

 

What are peoples thoughts?

 

That sounds logical....and fair, however, I do not want to deal with buyers like this and the list is a way to check and remember them for what happened.

 

I guess my point is, if the transaction is completed via the terms of the condition (where one of the possible outcomes is nonpayment with the seller keeping the deposit) can the non-buyer still be nominated for the probation list?

[Dr. Balls]

So as long as the seller gets the $100, then why should the buyer go on the Probation list? S/He fulfilled the contract, just not the best possible outcome of the contract. (In other words, time payments with built in penalties allow for two possible contractual fulfillments: Full payment, or non-payment with a monetary penalty).

 

What are peoples thoughts?

 

I agree. If a non-refundable deposit is in place to protect the seller from the buyer backing out, and they back out - the seller is compensated, and the buyer shouldn't have to be on the PL.

 

Yeah, the buyer has made in inconvenient, but the seller is compensated for holding the books. And if a seller doesn't feel that 5% was enough to hang onto the books for three months, increase it to 15% non-refundable.

[miraclemet]

So as long as the seller gets the $100, then why should the buyer go on the Probation list? S/He fulfilled the contract, just not the best possible outcome of the contract. (In other words, time payments with built in penalties allow for two possible contractual fulfillments: Full payment, or non-payment with a monetary penalty).

 

What are peoples thoughts?

 

I agree. If a non-refundable deposit is in place to protect the seller from the buyer backing out, and they back out - the seller is compensated, and the buyer shouldn't have to be on the PL.

 

Yeah, the buyer has made in inconvenient, but the seller is compensated for holding the books. And if a seller doesn't feel that 5% was enough to hang onto the books for three months, increase it to 15% non-refundable.

 

Yeah thats my thought too... now if the guy tries to do some non-delivery paypal shenanagins to try to get the deposit back... to the LIST!

[skypinkblu]

So as long as the seller gets the $100, then why should the buyer go on the Probation list? S/He fulfilled the contract, just not the best possible outcome of the contract. (In other words, time payments with built in penalties allow for two possible contractual fulfillments: Full payment, or non-payment with a monetary penalty).

 

What are peoples thoughts?

 

I agree. If a non-refundable deposit is in place to protect the seller from the buyer backing out, and they back out - the seller is compensated, and the buyer shouldn't have to be on the PL.

 

Yeah, the buyer has made in inconvenient, but the seller is compensated for holding the books. And if a seller doesn't feel that 5% was enough to hang onto the books for three months, increase it to 15% non-refundable.

 

I think they are two separate issues. The buyer has not paid what they were supposed to pay, period. If you allow a down payment to be enough to keep them off the list, then you open whole new cans of worms.

 

For example. I had someone who was supposed to pay 20% down, they paid about 3% and I never heard from them.

 

What if someone pays a down-payment and then a small part of what is owed...usually people make payment plans. If the person does not comply with the payment plan, would you want to deal with them? Or would you want to know that they have NOT complied, so you can avoid another payment plan disaster with them?

 

[miraclemet]

So as long as the seller gets the $100, then why should the buyer go on the Probation list? S/He fulfilled the contract, just not the best possible outcome of the contract. (In other words, time payments with built in penalties allow for two possible contractual fulfillments: Full payment, or non-payment with a monetary penalty).

 

What are peoples thoughts?

 

I agree. If a non-refundable deposit is in place to protect the seller from the buyer backing out, and they back out - the seller is compensated, and the buyer shouldn't have to be on the PL.

 

Yeah, the buyer has made in inconvenient, but the seller is compensated for holding the books. And if a seller doesn't feel that 5% was enough to hang onto the books for three months, increase it to 15% non-refundable.

 

I think they are two separate issues. The buyer has not paid what they were supposed to pay, period. If you allow a down payment to be enough to keep them off the list, then you open whole new cans of worms.

 

For example. I had someone who was supposed to pay 20% down, they paid about 3% and I never heard from them.

 

What if someone pays a down-payment and then a small part of what is owed...usually people make payment plans. If the person does not comply with the payment plan, would you want to deal with them? Or would you want to know that they have NOT complied, so you can avoid another payment plan disaster with them?

 

 

I understand your point SPB, and that's how the PL has always seemed to work (anyone backing out of a transaction goes on the PL unless it is made right). Part of my rationale is that the seller is baking in the "made right" part of the transaction by having a non-refundable deposit/penalty for non-payment.

 

I just think the rules should be clear that anyone backing out of a deal is still subject to possible PL regardless of any built in deposit/penalty conditions of the time payments.

[miraclemet]

For example. I had someone who was supposed to pay 20% down, they paid about 3% and I never heard from them.

 

in this case they didnt fulfill the initial contract, even to the extent of the down payment, so yes they'd be in violation of the agreement terms.

[miraclemet]

and SPB I agree, the point of the PL is to make the community aware of those who dont live up to their part of the marketplace agreements, so the spirit of the PL would mean anyone not fulfilling time payments could end up on the PL, regardless of any built in non-refundable amount.

[Green]

and SPB I agree, the point of the PL is to make the community aware of those who dont live up to their part of the marketplace agreements, so the spirit of the PL would mean anyone not fulfilling time payments could end up on the PL, regardless of any built in non-refundable amount.

YES!

[comicdonna]

I recall something about waiting three days from the time you bring up the issue in the probation thread

 

That's 3 days after sending a separate PM to the buyer/seller.

 

Mike, I'd just send him the separate PM, wait the 3 days (unless you sent one already) and move on. The 3 days is fair so that he knows it's over.

 

It's nice of you not to nominate him, but he deserves to be on that list.

The seperate PM was sent this morning. I will give him until Monday.

The buyer has contacted me. Due to personal reasons, he doesn't believe he will be able to come up with the payment. I told him there are no hard feelings, and I would resell the books.