Nominating RICK STARR 9 9

[jimjum12]

A disclaimer .... I consider John T to be a friend and have done transactions with him for over a decade. That being said, we have the list for a reason ... to serve as warning for problematic buyers and sellers. This presumably to reduce the disappointments from our self-policed market place, It is to identify buyers and sellers who refuse to honor a transaction. 

"Break a Deal, get The Wheel ... " Tina Turner, Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome. 

I would've had second thoughts on the book in question as well.... awesome book, but once listed, we have obligations to follow through , from the pauper all the way to the King. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by jimjum12

[mattn792]

1 hour ago, Foolkiller said:

I would not put John on the probation list.  couple of things:

1) if he had not received the check (and I do think he deserves the benefit of the doubt that it didn't especially if it wasn't cashed) in a timely fashion, he'd have the right to cancel the sale for whatever reason.  According to this, it was two weeks at which time he basically said, I didn't get it etc. and now I've decided I don't want to sell it.

2) I do agree with the sentiment that this is not so egregious that a probation list nomination is worthy and I do think some consideration should go to those who've had many, many, many successful transactions and the infraction is very minor.

3) All that said, I have no reason to doubt the buyer either in that he sent the check and this is disappointing and frustrating.  Some other accommodation or perhaps something else offered might have been a way to smooth it over.  

Regardless, I wouldn't put him on the probation list.

Reverse the situation though, and I'll use a current transaction of my own as an example:

Several days ago I put in a take on a four figure book, and payment isn't expected till the thread closes sometime next week.  Say next week rolls around, and instead of paying I tell the seller "Oh sorry, I spent all my free cash flow in the stock market last week during the downturn.  I can't buy your book anymore." 

The seller naturally gets upset with me, and I come back with "well its my money, and I've been in the hobby for x amount of time, and I've done transactions with persons x, y, and z, and my rep is great.  And after all, its only money."

Do I get a reprieve from the PL because I've been around the boards for about 5 years and have paid for 100% of my previous takes?  No, in fact I should know better than to renege on a deal like that, and my dumb*** should be on the PL until I've made things right by the seller I wronged. 

 

[BuscemasAvengers]

As Andy noted, USPS is extremely sluggish these days. A few thoughts ...

• Has there been any attempt to track the mailed check through tracking? (unless there was no tracking, which seems odd for a check of such an amount).
• Did John have (as one of his thread rules) that if payment isn't received within 'x' # of days, then yada yada yada?

[thewritestuff]

5 minutes ago, BuscemasAvengers said:

As Andy noted, USPS is extremely sluggish these days. A few thoughts ...

• Has there been any attempt to track the mailed check through tracking? (unless there was no tracking, which seems odd for a check of such an amount).
• Did John have (as one of his thread rules) that if payment isn't received within 'x' # of days, then yada yada yada?

I did not have tracking, as it was a personal check and I’ve never had an issue like this crop up. I had also conducted one transaction with the seller several months ago, and there were no issues with that exchange. Lesson learned, of course. I have confirmed with my bank that the check has not been cashed.

As stated, the seller directed me, the buyer, to wait several times. The first was after I expressed concern when the check did not arrive within a week’s time. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by thewritestuff

[JollyComics]

Do you remember GEEzusWalks being nominated here?  The seller changed their mind and didn't have the book (the seller didn't want to lose money on the book) so Rick Starr changed his mind to keep the book (he doesn't need the money). Both have some similar parallel.  This can't be repeated.

[jimjum12]

I never lost a package in 20 years... after covid19 I've lost 3 parcels in a year and had two different checks take over 2 weeks to arrive. GOD BLESS....

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[BuscemasAvengers]

1 minute ago, thewritestuff said:

I did not have tracking, as it was a personal check and I’ve never had an issue like this crop up. Lesson learned, of course. I have confirmed with my bank that the check has not been cashed.

As stated, the seller directed me, the buyer, to wait several times. The first was after I expressed concern when the check did not arrive within a week’s time. 

If the check is simply delayed because of the sluggishness of USPS at the moment (and surely most sellers who ship via USPS are aware of the present molasses-like delivery times of USPS), then the decision to not sell you the book seems odd.  I believe you offered to provide another form of payment (assuming you'd cancel your first check), but he advised to wait. (again, I hope we have John's side presented soon)

[wombat]

I think this is absolutely PL worthy. No one gets a free pass because they have a good reputation. As far as the whole check thing, the buyer made offers to rectify the check not getting there and the seller refused. You can't possibly hold that against the buyer. 

[wombat]

The seller also made it perfectly clear the reason for cancelling was not the lateness of the check, but he changed his mind. That is not acceptable for the boards. Does he have a "right" to not sell the book? Sure. Just like a buyer has the right to not pay for a book he claimed. That doesn't mean you don't face repercussions for exercising those rights. 

[JollyComics]

3 minutes ago, wombat said:

The seller also made it perfectly clear the reason for cancelling was not the lateness of the check, but he changed his mind. That is not acceptable for the boards. Does he have a "right" to not sell the book? Sure. Just like a buyer has the right to not pay for a book he claimed. That doesn't mean you don't face repercussions for exercising those rights. 

We need to see Rick Starr's recent sale thread if he mentioned "right" to not sell.  @thewritestuff  Can you direct us to his sale thread?

Edited October 28, 2020 by JollyComics

[seanfingh]

3 minutes ago, JollyComics said:

We need to see Rick Starr's recent sale thread if he mentioned "right" to not sell.  @thewritestuff  Can you direct us to his sale thread?

The "No returns on slabs" is a pretty ironic in light of this situation.

 

[wombat]

3 minutes ago, JollyComics said:

We need to see Rick Starr's recent sale thread if he mentioned "right" to not sell.  @thewritestuff  Can you direct us to his sale thread?

Are you saying someone might put in their sales thread the right to change their mind after someone claims a book and that would be OK? That would be troubling. 

[wombat]

1 minute ago, seanfingh said:

The "No returns on slabs" is a pretty ironic in light of this situation.

 

For those getting hung up on the check, that is listed as the preferred method of payment. And knowing how slow the mail is these days that has to be taken into consideration. 

[seanfingh]

4 minutes ago, JollyComics said:

We need to see Rick Starr's recent sale thread if he mentioned "right" to not sell.  @thewritestuff  Can you direct us to his sale thread?

Also, if you do a sales thread, you can put terms on there that says "no sales to PL/HOF" or even "I reserve the right to not sell to people I don't want to sell to." But none of that applies to a situation where deal was consummated without invoking those clauses prior thereto.

[Number 6]

9 minutes ago, JollyComics said:

We need to see Rick Starr's recent sale thread if he mentioned "right" to not sell.  @thewritestuff  Can you direct us to his sale thread?

I don’t think he meant “right” in terms of a sales thread rule. 
 

I think he just meant “right” in terms of nobody’s going to go to your house and twist your arm and force you to pack up and ship a book or hit the pay button on PayPal 

[Hudson]

@thewritestuff

Edited October 28, 2020 by Hudson

[Hudson]

I feel compelled to respond to this thread, while at the same time I feel saddened that these things even need to be discussed (especially here on the boards).  It is NOT that I do not believe they are worthy of discussion, but rather that I wish these incidents did not occur here, and hence there would be no need for threads like this.  At last, however, we must live in the world the way it is and not the way we would like for it to be.

I would like for @RICK STARR to come and give his side of the events, for without that we are forced to view only one side of this incident; that is the side of @thewritestuff , who, at this time, I have no reason to doubt.

If the events that occurred are as the OP posted then I do understand where the true debate is.  If, as the OP stated, the seller decided NOT to sell a book after the fact (simply because he decided he did not want to sell), then that is unacceptable behaviour.  To those who argue that the seller is a long standing and reputable dealer, I say, "then he should know better and honor his word".   If the seller was a new member to this board, I feel many of those siding with the "seller" would be silent.  I say that the rules must apply equally to all or there is no justice.  Do we have one set of rules for long standing members and one set for newer members?  I certainly would hope not, as I would not want to be a part of such a community as that.

Can anyone force the seller to honor his commitment?  I don't think so.  That is why we have a PL thread; a sort of self regulating justice system that helps hinder bad behavior.

At this point, if the facts are as the OP stated, then I believe the right course of action, is for the seller to 1) Apologize to the OP and 2) Make good on the deal (accept payment and send book as promised).

This is a comic book; is it really worth a person's reputation?  I guess I am old fashion, as my word is my bond and I am not willing to break it for a comic book or for anything else.

 

Calling...

@RICK STARR

[Kevin.J]

We were all happy to jump all over the no rep dude last week that refused to sell Miraclemet a book, this seems further on than that.

Every issue should be dealt with the same regardless of rep or the system doesnt work.

Hopefully this doesnt need to go as out of control as that went.

Be nice to see what Rick has to say 

[thehumantorch]

1 hour ago, wombat said:

I think this is absolutely PL worthy. No one gets a free pass because they have a good reputation. As far as the whole check thing, the buyer made offers to rectify the check not getting there and the seller refused. You can't possibly hold that against the buyer. 

Agreed.   

Boardie agamoto has been called out in the discussion thread for refusing to sell a book that was taken and  the situations are similar.  I'd hate to start making exceptions to the rules because a boardie is popular or a longer history of selling and posting.  A deal is a deal 

And thewritestuff is out something.  The postage to mail a check is minor but it is real.  Cancelling the check will cost him something.  He's also out time and he may have passed on another purchase because his funds were committed to this book.

[Buzzetta]

 

3 hours ago, comicdonna said:

I agree.  Many times I have seen people say when a seller refuses to sell to you, you really aren't out anything.  On the flip side, when a buyer refuses to pay, they get put on the probation list.  It shouldn't matter weather the person  "wronged" is a buyer or seller.  If a deal is made, money and book should both exchange hands, and if either refuses, they should be held accountable.  

There is also the idea of missed opportunity. 

Imagine this scenario.  Let's make believe that I am looking for a ASM 300 in a 9.6.  That was basically a $1000 book a month ago.   Let's make believe that I take a look and see:

• Seller A has it for $1000
• Seller B has it for $1000
• There is an auction ending where it will land at around $1000

I decide as a buyer to commit to purchasing the book from Seller A.  A few weeks go by and seller A has not shipped the book out.  He has not cashed my check either.  Seller A comes back and says that for whatever reason, I am not getting the book. 

By that time, Seller B has sold his book.  The auction is over and the book has sold for $1000.  It is now a month later.  That $1000 book is now selling for $1600. 

 

So yeah, the buyer is kind of at a loss here.  He has lost opportunity and in a way that buyer's money was tied up because he had committed to dedicating those funds to that particular purchase.  Now, to prove that there is an issue of overt wrongdoing on the seller's end you would have to find evidence that he had no intention of selling the book.  Because if he had let you know from the beginning you would have looked for that book someplace else.