Time payments and deposits. Need input.

[Dr. Balls]

Take it from someone who experienced the worst time payment fiasco in the history of the boards.

 

Curiously cryptic...

It was so cryptic that I didn't even know who I was talking to.

 

 

Was it that thing that happened that one time with that guy who we've all seen on here before?

[The-Collector]

Prior to him filing a claim and calling me a scammer I probably would have issued a full refund and kept it private. Once he tried to take it back through a claim and insulted me for his irresponsibility I would keep all $600 as well as naming and shaming.

 

 

[Mark 1]

Who else would agree to a $600 non refundable deposit? That's insane. Good for the seller for getting that agreement. The buyer certainly is at fault here for not fulfilling the transaction. However a $600 non refundable deposit is a lot to ask. I would never agree to those terms.

 

 

[VintageComics]

Who else would agree to a $600 non refundable deposit? That's insane. Good for the seller for getting that agreement. The buyer certainly is at fault here for not fulfilling the transaction. However a $600 non refundable deposit is a lot to ask. I would never agree to those terms.

 

 

Depends on the size of the book though, doesn't it?

 

$600 is not a lot of money relatively speaking if it's a big book.

 

How much of a bigger inconvenience is it to remove a big book from the market and eliminate any other potential offers because you have it "sold" only to find out that they guy is backing out?

 

 

 

 

[newshane]

No refund. A written understanding clearly defined the rules of the game.

 

Of course I don't understand why the deposit was made "non-refundable" in the first place...unless you were losing that much money simply by hanging on to it for that long.

 

Must be one hot book for all that.

 

 

[MrBedrock]

Part of this deal hasn't been sufficiently explained to me. A buyer has paid $600 towards a $1600 book. The payment dates have been agreed upon and the seller is late on those payments. All of that I understand.

 

But the seller nullifies the deal because the buyer spent some money elsewhere? I hate to be a contrarian, but it is really no business of the seller what the buyer is doing with his money. And using that as a reason to stop a deal won't wash in most instances. The fact is the buyer is late making a payment. The seller is certainly within his rights to stop the deal. But with a customer having already paid $600 towards a $1600 book and payment plans being made in the first place, I really think the seller should have worked a little harder to give the buyer a chance to complete the sale. I know that in a black and white world the seller has every right to do what he has done. And frankly, given the agreements, the seller doesn't owe the buyer a penny of a refund of the $600 deposit. But it just sounds like the seller made a judgement call to cancel the sale because he was upset that the buyer spent some loot elsewhere. And because of this he has created unnecessary conflict in a deal that in all likelihood would have worked out just fine with some time and some compassion.

[DR.X]

I think Richard is missing the part where the seller claims on ( 1/21 ) that both checks were in the mail.

 

Now I understand sometimes mail delivery is slow, but if the checks aren't in the mail, the buyer is not being honest with the seller about payment, yet buying books elswhere. I can't talk for anyone else, but that would pizz me off a bit.

[MrBedrock]

Yep. Buyer is a doosh.

[DrWatson]

Yep. Buyer is a doosh.

Hold on, now. We don't who the seller is just yet. We may have multiple dooshes.

[Dick Pontoon]

Never mind.

 

I misquoted myself. Who would have thought I had something in common with Charles Barkley?

 

 

 

[DrWatson]

Never mind.

 

I misquoted myself. Who would have thought I had something in common with Charles Barkley?

 

 

Did RuPaul gain weight?

[MrBedrock]

Yep. Buyer is a doosh.

Hold on, now. We don't who the seller is just yet. We may have multiple dooshes.

Oh we have multiple dooshes. But most of them aren't involved in this transaction.

[DrWatson]

Yep. Buyer is a doosh.

Hold on, now. We don't who the seller is just yet. We may have multiple dooshes.

Oh we have multiple dooshes. But most of them aren't involved in this transaction.

Are you saying we might have a menage a doosh?!?

[ChrisInBaltimore]

This kind of stuff is a shame. I've done a few time payments here and they've been great.They were for books I could have never purchased other wise. These kind of buyers make people apprehensive about it.

 

Heck this month I was really hurting on money still trying to recover from the holidays. I'd committed to pay something off though and did just that. People need to live up to their deals.

 

I think I'd out him and keep the $600. If it was clear it was non refundable then it sucks for him. Of course $600 is a lot.

[sterlingcomics]

1/23: Buyer purchases $1200 book in CLink auction.

 

Should seller offer full refund, partial refund or no refund at all?

 

The information above about CL is actually not related to your transaction (yes it would me off too)...just out of curiosity how do you know?

 

Well, full refund is out of the question. Do no refund or partial. Legally "no refund" would be the agreed to terms. I don't think the buyer has any leeway to amend the conditions of the contract by basically saying "give me partial and I won't fight it". He shouldn't fight NO refund, although I agree with others percentage-wise of the purchase price it is non-standard.

 

From a mercy standpoint, I get that this happens sometimes. Personally I would understand, minimize his losses etc. but wouldn't go out of my way for said person moving forward. Lying about the checks would make me go with $250 refund...I wouldn't go for HIS number just to make that statement.

[joeypost]

I can see keeping a percentage for your time, but keeping $300 or $600 is harsh. If you want to teach him a lesson keep $100 for your time and trouble, out him and move on.

 

The buyer seems to have over extended himself knowingly and now has to at least pay/face the piper.

[Logan510]

I can see keeping a percentage for your time, but keeping $300 or $600 is harsh. If you want to teach him a lesson keep $100 for your time and trouble, out him and move on.

 

The buyer seems to have over extended himself knowingly and now has to at least pay/face the piper.

 

I agree with you...but there's something incredibly dooshy about spending money when you owe and lying about the checks being in the mail. Maybe it's harsh, but I would rather not see people like that welcomed here

[mikenyc]

I can see keeping a percentage for your time, but keeping $300 or $600 is harsh. If you want to teach him a lesson keep $100 for your time and trouble, out him and move on.

 

The buyer seems to have over extended himself knowingly and now has to at least pay/face the piper.

 

[comicwiz]

I mostly agree with GATor, and the last time I checked, accepting any payment through PayPal as a deposit or as an installment for a time payment schedule is not allowed. The seller would lose in the dispute.

 

 

[MR SigS]

People have to be taught personal financial responsibility.

 

This wasn't caused by some unforseen situation.

 

It was exacerbated by the fact that the "buyer" decided to buy another book before the first one was paid for.

 

Greg

 

+1

 

If not for this and the "checks are in the mail" lie I might say a partial refund is okay, but he broke the agreement on his own.

 

I've purchased many of my keys here, on time payments, from some SUPREMELY AWESOME boardies and I imagine situations like this only turns sellers off from offering.

 

Not good for the rest of us