Rrog:
I must take exception to the points you make in your post.
First, you state that "... the first thing that may enter the buyer's mind is, what else is the seller lying about." In order for a lie to occur there must be a misrepresentation of the facts AND a purposeful attempt to deceive. Although the seller did misrepresent the facts, I truly do not believe he was trying to be deceptive. I do not for one minute think that when he checked that Audiogon box he thought to himself, "I'm really going to screw this guy!". Also, absent a severe psychological condition, I don't belive a buyer would assume that a fraud had been perpetrated based soley on a missing manual! You, however, have no problem in suggesting that is exactly what the buyer may have thought.
Secondly, you state that "The real problem here is Jax misrepresented what he was selling." Again, I beg to differ. Although the seller's action was clearly the ORIGIN of the problem, the "real problem" (to use your words) is the buyers unreasonable response to the sellers well intentioned, bend-over-backwards attempts to rectify the situation. While the seller is obviously trying to accomodate, the words from the buyer's emails convey the message he will have to be dragged to a compromise kicking and screaming. That, my friend, is THE REAL PROBLEM!
Finally, if this dispute was heard in a court of law I would find immediately for the buyer. I would then award him $1.00 in damages and tell him to consider himself lucky that the law does not allow a lesser award.
On the otherhand, if this case was tried in the court of public opinion the seller wins hands down. In fact, if that court was convened in Wyoming or Montana the official transcript reads, "The buyer acted like a horses a$$, case dismissed!".
I must take exception to the points you make in your post.
First, you state that "... the first thing that may enter the buyer's mind is, what else is the seller lying about." In order for a lie to occur there must be a misrepresentation of the facts AND a purposeful attempt to deceive. Although the seller did misrepresent the facts, I truly do not believe he was trying to be deceptive. I do not for one minute think that when he checked that Audiogon box he thought to himself, "I'm really going to screw this guy!". Also, absent a severe psychological condition, I don't belive a buyer would assume that a fraud had been perpetrated based soley on a missing manual! You, however, have no problem in suggesting that is exactly what the buyer may have thought.
Secondly, you state that "The real problem here is Jax misrepresented what he was selling." Again, I beg to differ. Although the seller's action was clearly the ORIGIN of the problem, the "real problem" (to use your words) is the buyers unreasonable response to the sellers well intentioned, bend-over-backwards attempts to rectify the situation. While the seller is obviously trying to accomodate, the words from the buyer's emails convey the message he will have to be dragged to a compromise kicking and screaming. That, my friend, is THE REAL PROBLEM!
Finally, if this dispute was heard in a court of law I would find immediately for the buyer. I would then award him $1.00 in damages and tell him to consider himself lucky that the law does not allow a lesser award.
On the otherhand, if this case was tried in the court of public opinion the seller wins hands down. In fact, if that court was convened in Wyoming or Montana the official transcript reads, "The buyer acted like a horses a$$, case dismissed!".