Selling dispute. Please comment.
Mint.... Original manual.... Seller should have checked to make sure. These are seemingly important to this buyer, and might have been the swaying factor in his purchase. The seller is fully responsible for the satisfaction of the transaction. Even if it's something out of his hands like shipping damage. So, no matter how unreasonable we think the buyer is, the item was misrepresented. |
Check out my feedback on here and ebay. It isn't perfect for no reason. 5.0 on my seller dashboard also. I know how to treat buyers, but never let them walk all over me. Lots of buyers want everything and haven't got the means, so they will use any excuse to get their money back or something for free. I as a buyer do want original manuals if it's possible and original boxes because it does help to get items sold, especially Linn products. As far as me being a fair seller, my attitude is if you don't have the means butt out. |
"Mint.... Original manual.... Seller should have checked to make sure." I never said anything about the manual in the description. When you fill out the classified ad form on audiogon there is a checkbox for "manual included". I checked that box. You see, there were in fact various documents in the boxes that were from the manufacturer. They were inside large white envelopes. I peeked inside the envelopes saw some docs in there and said to myself "Ahh, those much be the docs that come with the amp". So when I checked the "manual included" box I really meant was that the buyer would get whatever paper docs were originally in the box. Not so much that they would specifically be a manual. After speaking with the manufacturer, I really think the buyer DID in fact get whatever is originally included in the box. They don't put manuals in the box, but there is some paperwork. |
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!". |
Shoff, you make some good points, but I would add that if this were Wyoming or Montana (or a lot of other places), the seller would have worked this out with the buyer and been done with it without subjecting the whole pitiful experience to the court of public opinion. IMO, the real problem is that both buyer and seller would rather throw nuts at each other than own up and move on. Jaxwired's original talk about various papers from the manufacturer in the boxesand especially his more recent post So when I checked the "manual included" box I really meant was that the buyer would get whatever paper docs were originally in the box. Not so much that they would specifically be a manual.is absolute BS, and simply a justification to himself (and to us) that he didn't "actually" screw up by not verifying the original manual was in the box before listing the ad or shipping the amps. I get it, we all screw up sometimes, but quit whining about it and resolve it. A review of the Audiogon "Seller's Checklist" shows "Do you have the owner's manual?" being one of the questions to answer. In this case the seller did not, but checked that he did. Regardless that 99 out of 100 of us would have happily accepted the pdf manual, and regardless that the buyer comes off as an ass-wipe from his e-mails, the fact remains that the seller did not complete his commitment. Therefore, this boils down to either the buyer accepting the proposed solution (pdf manual), or the seller accepting the return of the amps. BTW, when you post an ad, the seller's checkbox reads "Owner's Manual Included" but the actual ad lists the manual under "Original Accessories." The absence of the word "original" in the ad posting checkbox and the inclusion of "original" in the listing is a discrepancy that Audiogon should fix, especially after this thread. |
Further and further down the rabbit hole we go. It gets strange down here. It's here that we find... ∀F(Fx ↔ Fy) → x=y F = discernable characteristics x = original manual y = replacement manual If the seller provides a replacement manual whose discernable characteristics are equivalent to those of the original manual, then he has, quite literally, provided an *identical* manual. This is the Principle of the Identity of Indiscernibles, first described by W.G. Leibniz, German philosopher and mathematician who, among other things, co-invented calculus. What makes one manual identical to another is not that it has the same trajectory through space and time. It's that it contains the same INFORMATION. It is for this reason that we can say that, when I watch a TV program in Los Angeles, and you watch it in Helena Montana, we have seen the same program, even though I saw it several seconds before you did, while in a different location, and as a result of a different radio wave trajectory. What makes it the "same" program is the INFORMATION it contains. Same information. Same program. What goes for TV programs goes for movies, books, photographs, albums, manuals, or any other entity whose discernible characteristics are overwhelmingly defined by the INFORMATION they contain. Otherwise, we would find ourselves in a world where you say "We're reading the same book," and I say, "That's impossible. It hasn't left my bedstand for weeks!" Or, as Alice said... "I wonder if I've been changed in the night? Let me think: was I the same when I got up this morning? I almost think I can remember feeling a little different. But if I'm not the same, the next question is 'Who in the world am I?' Ah, that's the great puzzle!"This thread has sounded a little like Wonderland. IMO, of course. Bryon |
The buyer simply meant to include the manual. It was a logical implication, of sorts, on his part. His point of reference was the papers in the envelopes included in the boxes. The reference of that's all that was included from the manufacturer should be enough, in hindsight, to quell the matter. Going the lengths to make better 'copies' of a manual that may had never come with the amps is going beyond what would be considered accommodating, This type of behavior, on the buyers part, can be observed in life. One time I had to have a broken windshield replaced on my car. I wanted an original to be used as it has green tinting in it to reduce heat but my adjuster refused. I pointed out that it is clearly stated in the car's description, which could be referenced online, but he demanded I produce the original dealers invoice that appears on the window, stating the equipment, features, and extras and that legally, he was under no obligation to use original factory parts unless I had that stupid window sticker. It took three replacement windows before I got one that I could see out of, undistorted. The adjuster would have saved money had he just went out and got a proper window. It works both ways and serves no one when being stubborn beyond what is reasonable. All the best, Nonoise |
Yeah, I'd like to hear an update as well. And a couple of more things, even tho I commented before: I'm still 99.999% on the side of the seller, & think the buyer is a total d'bag. But after selling maybe a thousand items on fee-bay, & a few dozen on A'gon, I've become even more incredibly anal about checking the item over many times, measuring, taking pics of even the box & manual if it's camera or audio gear, etc. And a final check before I ship, b/c I live in fear of A-hole buyers like this one. Doing the "final check" of the item, a very few times (over many years), I've found a tiny mistake, & e-mailed the buyer before shipping. If you can nip a mistake, no matter how small, "in the bud" so much the better. But I still suspect this buyer is a very unhappy person, who has a pattern of this type of bullying, unreasonable behavior..... |
Jax has positive feedback dated 9/3 on an amplifier, so hopefully it all worked out???Acman3, Yes it would appear so.... Jaxwired's Feedback Extremely fast shipping: bought the monoblocks Wednesday morning, Tom took them to the shippers at noontime, and I received them on Saturday. Well boxed and exactly as described - mint. Thanks, Tom. Jaxwired Must be out of town as I notice he has not left feedback for the buyer as yet. . |
Hi guys. Sorry for the delay. Just haven't checked back in awhile. Yes, the buyer never said a word about the manuals I sent. But the day he got them (I sent them sig required), positive feedback appeared. And very positive feedback. Apprarently he was happy with those manuals. It was a relief. I did not return the positive feedback. That would feel disingenuous. I prefer to abstain on feedback this time. While he was within his rights, the way he went about things created unnecessary stress. Thanks again to everyone that responded to this thread. The opposing views gave me perspective and the supporting views were comforting. : ) |
Wow, I'm shocked regarding the outcome. I was in the camp that he just had buyer's remorse. In any case I'm happy for you. I will be thinking very carefully about checking that 'original manual' box from now on as I usually take it to mean 'do I have whatever original paperwork there was' and not specifically a 'manual'. |
I'm glad everything worked out for the both of you. I wouldn't leave feedback either. I DO think that original boxes manuals and accessories are important though. I have all items for each unit in my system. It's nice to have a complete portfolio when possible. Thanks for the update and best of luck. |
"Have you tried or suggested that the two of you speak on the phone? I think email can be pretty brutal sometimes. Taking time to talk it through might help bring this back to a more even keel level. Take the emotion out of it. Discuss it 1:1 and try to come up w/ a fair resolution. Good luck." What is this "phone" thing of which you speak? Is it some sort of divining instrument? Does it require fire? A sacrifice? Perhaps it is an oracle? As for me, I'll stick to the only communication system ever known to most human beings: Internet emails. All this other stuff sounds too much like voodoo. Wink, wink--nudge, nudge |
In re: rating something one number but saying it is another ("I'm rating it a 2 but really it is a 10"). I have no problem with that. As someone mentioned above, it provides leeway in people's different interpretations. I may feel something is a 9 but someone else may think It is a 10, but someone else yet may see it and rate it a 7. That's a big swing in ratings and, consequently, a big potential swing in value. To deal with this I think a better solution is a picture, giving your own interpretation. OTOH, I understand why some people find this annoying. |
