Ebay Scam Sellers List

[Sal]

you guys gonna nominate someone who sells a lot on ebay? i mean, Pov and Red both sell - to the best of my knowledge - but they're not exactly Power Sellers.

 

i would imagine someone who had a ton of selling experience - like greggy, Donut, nochips or ft88 might be able to bring a perspective to the table that would be pretty valuable.

 

also, i wonder if you've got someone that buys a lot. i honestly don't know.

 

rickdogg - if he's still around much - would be good, too

[Elvis]

you guys gonna nominate someone who sells a lot on ebay? i mean, Pov and Red both sell - to the best of my knowledge - but they're not exactly Power Sellers.

 

i would imagine someone who had a ton of selling experience - like greggy, Donut, nochips or ft88 might be able to bring a perspective to the table that would be pretty valuable.

 

also, i wonder if you've got someone that buys a lot. i honestly don't know.

 

rickdogg - if he's still around much - would be good, too

 

Greggy seems like a good choice. Usually has level headed posts.

 

Elvis

[Wally's Comics]

you guys gonna nominate someone who sells a lot on ebay? i mean, Pov and Red both sell - to the best of my knowledge - but they're not exactly Power Sellers.

 

i would imagine someone who had a ton of selling experience - like greggy, Donut, nochips or ft88 might be able to bring a perspective to the table that would be pretty valuable.

 

also, i wonder if you've got someone that buys a lot. i honestly don't know.

 

rickdogg - if he's still around much - would be good, too

 

Greggy seems like a good choice. Usually has level headed posts.

 

Elvis

 

 

 

 

[nik]

Greggy seems like a good choice. Usually has level headed posts.

 

Elvis

 

[Wally's Comics]

Greggy seems like a good choice. Usually has level headed posts.

 

Elvis

 

 

[Elvis]

Greggy seems like a good choice. Usually has level headed posts.

 

Elvis

 

 

 

I figured that would get a reaction.

 

How about Rob React?

[Red Hook]

Greggy seems like a good choice. Usually has level headed posts.

 

Elvis

 

Yeah, except as far as I know, he still has me on ignore since Nikos' last grading contest.

 

Red

[Rocketeer]

you guys gonna nominate someone who sells a lot on ebay? i mean, Pov and Red both sell - to the best of my knowledge - but they're not exactly Power Sellers.

 

i would imagine someone who had a ton of selling experience - like greggy, Donut, nochips or ft88 might be able to bring a perspective to the table that would be pretty valuable.

 

also, i wonder if you've got someone that buys a lot. i honestly don't know.

 

rickdogg - if he's still around much - would be good, too

 

Greggy seems like a good choice. Usually has level headed posts.

 

Elvis

 

..Yes,..Greggy is quite level headed,...but unfortunately the posts come out his neck,....

 

[CW]

I guess we better not call it the crappy sellers thread cause I don't think anybody wants to be sued for libel or defamation of character. I think we should simply state robot like fact and let the readers be the judge of how the seller or buyer should be interpreted. ID, Complaint, actions taken, response, and id of complaintant. This will provide great info for ebayers while not implicating anyone of anything. I also think that complaints of bad grading should be kept to extremely bad cases ie NM is actually VG. We could argue all day about NM to VF. Perhaps a thread called Educated Ebayers or something like that that can't be used as legal ammunition.

[Foolkiller]

Uh, no, we can call whoever we like a crappy seller. I will take all comers on the defamation or libel suits since I will not be accusing anyone of anything that isn't true. Otherwise, it's just an opinion of customer service or grading abilities, nobody's suing you for anything.

 

Just remember truth is a defense. y'know soon enough some famous seller is going to be known as the new danny dupcak of our hobby -- gee, I wonder who's in line for that title?

[worldsbestcomics]

I agree with Foolkiller. Let's call them what they are. There is no concern about libel as long as long as the posts are factual.

[Sal]

if everyone were to input every eBay transaction they completed with a rating from one to ten on a couple of important points - ie. shipping, grading, communication, etc - into an online form, someone could then write a database analysis tool which would allow these sellers to be ranked. either for overall score, or for specific scores.

 

i would like to not only know who not to buy from, but who people have had good luck with in the past. kind of like a GPAnalysis of eBay sellers.

 

this of course would be similar to - but far better than - eBay's stupid (imho) feedback thing which is just asking to be misused

[esquirecomics]

I agree with Foolkiller. Let's call them what they are. There is no concern about libel as long as long as the posts are factual.

 

Famous last words. St. Martin's Press thought the same thing before I sued them for libel for accusing my client of murdering President Kennedy. They even included a 17 page chapter written by their lawyers explaining how everything the book was saying was "factual".

 

I highly recommend you keep the list and the postings very professional and straightforward.

[johny myman-migration]

I agree with Foolkiller. Let's call them what they are. There is no concern about libel as long as long as the posts are factual.

 

Famous last words. St. Martin's Press thought the same thing before I sued them for libel for accusing my client of murdering President Kennedy. They even included a 17 page chapter written by their lawyers explaining how everything the book was saying was "factual".

 

I highly recommend you keep the list and the postings very professional and straightforward.

 

 

All those ebay Lawyers

[CW]

I think I am going to leave this list to the pro's it looks like it might be turning into a little more than I bargained for. I will be interested in how it develops whether it stays tight and factual or turns into another "FF3" Good luck.

[Foolkiller]

Mark,

 

You're blurring the lines here on the law, and I know YOU know the difference, but I hope everyone else here knows. First of all, when I say truth is a defense, that's correct, if it is in fact the truth. I'm guessing but I'm betting your situation is one in which they asserted that it was in fact the "truth" but while there was support for it, the libelous action was carried (of course you never noted that you were successful, but I'll assume you were) because in making such an assertion, you cannot merely assert that it's true and offer "some" evidence open to interpretation, but rather the facts themselves must be true.

 

However, if you accuse someone of a subjective standard like offering an opinion... I think their grading sucks -- well, there's no objective standard really to measure by, so I'm not sure how you would carry a libel suit there.

 

On top of that, the professional or lack of professional nature of what people write on these boards is really the question isn't it? I mean, how are any of these people going to show damages from the messages written on the boards? I think not. Even if they could, how would they quantify it. You want to spend a lot of money going after a suit to make a point? I know you might, but there are few lawyers who feel the need to make a point about a comic chatboard.

 

The truth is a defense if the facts you are asserting are just that facts. You cannot claim them to be facts.

 

I wanted to clarify that point.

[johny myman-migration]

Mark, are you this guy?

 

 

Leonard "J." Crabs

 

Who is Leonard Crabs?

 

Leonard Crabs has been practicing law ever since he was 15 years old and saw a friend wreck his bicycle into a tree. He successfully sued the owner of the tree for "gross negligence" and was awarded the sum of $15 million which he immediately spent on Pez and Hustler magazines. Now Leonard is much older and has expanded his operation to sue tree owners in over three states. He also handles various other accidents, whether they involve a tree or not. Although he prefers the tree ones much more.

 

Leonard loves to fight the "big insurance companies" that want to "hold out" on paying you for an "injury" that was due to your "pure, unadulterated stupidity." If he can't get a court case against these companies, you can often find him outside their offices, screaming obscenities and challenging the president to a knife fight. This unique, no-holds-barred approach to legal defense has earned Leonard a place on the ATLA (Association of Trial Lawyers of America), although they are not currently aware of it.

 

What has Leonard done?

 

Leonard has helped hundreds (or 6) people reclaim millions (15.32) of dollars in lost income due to their own blatant idiocy. He has changed the life of a little girl in the hospital that had leukemia. He built the Suez Canal. He is responsible for creating the microchip. Leonard is known world wide for the great deeds he has accomplished and he is ready and willing to work for you! But don't take our word for it, let's listen to a few satisfied customers!

[esquirecomics]

Mark,

 

You're blurring the lines here on the law, and I know YOU know the difference, but I hope everyone else here knows. First of all, when I say truth is a defense, that's correct, if it is in fact the truth. I'm guessing but I'm betting your situation is one in which they asserted that it was in fact the "truth" but while there was support for it, the libelous action was carried (of course you never noted that you were successful, but I'll assume you were) because in making such an assertion, you cannot merely assert that it's true and offer "some" evidence open to interpretation, but rather the facts themselves must be true.

 

However, if you accuse someone of a subjective standard like offering an opinion... I think their grading sucks -- well, there's no objective standard really to measure by, so I'm not sure how you would carry a libel suit there.

 

On top of that, the professional or lack of professional nature of what people write on these boards is really the question isn't it? I mean, how are any of these people going to show damages from the messages written on the boards? I think not. Even if they could, how would they quantify it. You want to spend a lot of money going after a suit to make a point? I know you might, but there are few lawyers who feel the need to make a point about a comic chatboard.

 

The truth is a defense if the facts you are asserting are just that facts. You cannot claim them to be facts.

 

I wanted to clarify that point.

 

Brian, it of course depends on what is written. Certainly subjective opinion such as "his grading is terrible" is not actionable. But time and time again people have written on these boards that a certain seller is a "fraud" based on a transaction that met the relevant criteria. It was not always the case and I can speak to that personally due to a misunderstanding I had with a particular seller.

 

Would someone sue an individual who posted on these boards if they were libeled? One can never predict the actions of another, but there is no doubt in my mind that the postings of many on these boards clearly influence the actions of others and that includes whether to buy or not to buy from a particular ebay seller. Just look at any number of threads and this is obvious.

 

Plus, it is not just the forumites on these boards who read our posts. Google, for example, picks up postings from these boards just like it does with any other website. So there is definitely reason to believe that someone totally unassociated with these boards may stumble upon derogatory information concerning an ebay seller that is inaccurate.

 

BTW, with respect to that case against St. Martin's, I actually lost on the law but won at the end of the day. St. Martin's paid a sizable sum to my client and issued a public apology.

 

The Baltimore Sun

 

February 3, 1998, Tuesday, FINAL EDITION

 

SECTION: LOCAL (NEWS), Pg. 2B

 

LENGTH: 477 words

 

HEADLINE: Lawsuit is settled in favor of former Secret Service agent; Book claimed man accidentally fired bullet that killed Kennedy

 

BYLINE: Michael James, SUN STAFF

 

BODY:

A retired U.S. Secret Service agent has been paid an undisclosed sum of money by the publishers of a book that claimed he fired the bullet that killed President John F. Kennedy, an allegation that prompted the agent to sue.

 

The obscure book, "Mortal Error: The Shot That Killed JFK," claimed that George W. Hickey Jr. slipped during the confusion on Nov. 22, 1963, and accidentally pulled the trigger of his high-powered AR-15 rifle. Kennedy, according to Missouri-based author Bonar Menninger, was hit in the head by the bullet.

 

Hickey, who lives in Abingdon, filed a libel suit in U.S. District Court in Baltimore. He has received a confidential monetary settlement in the case, according to attorneys representing Hickey and St. Martin's Press, which published the book.

 

"We're very satisfied with the settlement," said Mark S. Zaid, Hickey's attorney in Washington, who called the book's claims "ridiculous."

 

"To think that someone could have fired an AR-15 rifle on that day and that no one would have noticed, of the hundreds of people that were watching on either side of the street, just bends the imagination," Zaid said.

 

David N. Kaye, chief attorney for St. Martin's, said yesterday that the book "never said Mr. Hickey did anything wrong" and instead portrayed his role in "a tragic accident."

 

The decision to settle the case was made because "lawyers are expensive and we have no quarrel with Mr. Hickey," Kaye said.

 

John Sargent, chief executive officer of St. Martin's Press, recently sent a letter to Hickey saying the book "was in no way meant as a criticism of you. We know of no information that denigrates your dedication to the Secret Service, President John F. Kennedy or this country."

 

St. Martin's fended off the litigation in September, when a U.S. District Court judge dismissed the suit, ruling that Hickey had waited too long to sue. The book was published in February 1992, and Hickey sued April 21, 1995, exceeding Maryland's one-year statute of limitations for defamation claims.

 

Zaid appealed the case, intending to argue that other book sellers have republished Menninger's allegations in reference works and encyclopedias. Zaid argued that the original publisher should be held liable for republication.

 

The settlement was reached before paperwork was filed with the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals.

 

On the day of the assassination, Hickey was a 40-year-old Secret Service agent assigned to Kennedy's Dallas motorcade. Menninger wrote that Hickey grabbed an AR-15 assault rifle after Lee Harvey Oswald fired at Kennedy and that Hickey's rifle discharged when the car he was riding in, behind Kennedy's, changed speed.

 

Menninger couldn't be reached last night. Hickey, through his lawyer, refused to be interviewed. He retired in good standing from the Secret Service in 1971.

[Foolkiller]

I'll tell you what Mark, I'd LOVE for one of these so called reputable dealers to sue for libel -- because the opportunity to take discovery in the course of the suit would be truly, truly wonderful. As for the facts of your case, I suspected that was the situation when you posted. Glad for you they decided to settle and not litigate an appeal that probably would have been both costly and risky.

[johny myman-migration]

Mark, I know this is you

 

What has Leonard done?

 

 

 

 

 

before

"I was in an awful accident. I was talking on my cellphone while eating a sandwich while changing the radio station while driving my sports-utility vehicle, and some guy came out of nowhere and drove in front of me. He quickly shifted into reverse and hit me dead on! I was so shaken up I accidentally dropped my sandwich on the floor! Leonard Crabs helped me recover 38 cents from Ford Motor Company because they failed to include a sandwich feeding machine in their vehicles. Leonard Crabs saved my marriage!"

 

-KW, San Jose

 

 

 

 

after

 

 

 

before

"When I fell out of that tree and landed on my testicles three years ago, the doctors said I couldn't have any kids. This made me so sad I climbed back up the tree to weep and fell out again. They told me I suffered a broken leg from that fall, which sent me into a dizzying depression that ended only when I stole a lawn tractor and drove it into the neighbor's drainage ditch. All the other lawyers claimed there was nobody I could sue, but Leonard Crabs told me otherwise! After suing the GOP for 'gross negligence', Leonard won me enough change to ride the bus home... TWICE!"

 

-WK, Saint Joe