posted on May 23, 2001 03:19:24 PMExecutiveGirl and mhillyrd,
You both have made several personally insulting comments. Please remember to discuss the topic, not the individual. If you cannot discuss the topic without insulting one another, I will have to lock this thread.
posted on May 23, 2001 03:22:16 PM
The problem is, do you really think the buyer will admit to have washed it or otherwise done something to alter it. I doubt it.
EG haven't you given the buyer a neg already? I would have.
posted on May 23, 2001 03:25:54 PM
In reply to clearasmud.
I know she is a fraud because she told me how well she checked this item out. She knows what she has done, she's done it before and not refunded money, from the looks of her feedback. This is not all worth any where near $15.99. Again it is the principle, I was sold something that was intentionally misrepresented.
She also claims to be able to file fraud charges against me, rediculous and untrue. again she has my money, I have the trash she sold me, which is worthless. There is no case for fraud against me. I have all the proof I need against this seller.
[ edited by mhillyrd on May 23, 2001 03:28 PM ]
posted on May 23, 2001 03:26:42 PM
I have a hard time believing that a buyer who also sells clothes on ebaY would tear apart a clothing item just to get a refund. I'm not saying the seller here is wrong, but the whole situation is very, very strange.
posted on May 23, 2001 03:31:19 PM
Thank you kerryman. There is absolutely no way I would do that. Consider this, the chance that I will get a refund is practically nil since I sent a money order. I am personally just out the money and a decent item. I DO SELL ITEMS BUT WOULD NEVER SELL THIS.
posted on May 23, 2001 03:32:16 PM
Well, EG, I think BJ is right.
Whatever she may or may not have done to the item, the neg (and wording) is appropriate.
Time to call it a day on this one, just keep my atty's number handy! How silly over 20 bucks! I'll give you twenty for the lesson. You'd be amazed how many issues I have that I don't even bother to post here, they're so trivial compared to yours!
ummm, about the check, did you forget?
I'm in Florida.
You don't mail things here.
PayPal will be just dandy
posted on May 23, 2001 03:34:08 PM
FWIW, I peeked at the auction itself, and the close-up photo of the tag says "EAN ONLY" (the corner of the tag is curled a bit and the first part doesn't show), but it probably says "Dry Clean Only".
posted on May 23, 2001 03:37:18 PM
thanks, shaani.
I see no damage, though.
mhillyrd:
Didn't you say about a page ago that you were done?
Three times, I believe.
For some reason I am reminded of my ex-husband.........
posted on May 23, 2001 03:40:49 PM
No it is the first button hole in my photo, I was referring to. Which is actually the second in her pic, and the ones below that you don't see. If she were to have taken a pic of the item unbuttoned no one would have bought it.
It is so easy to misconstrue things when they are passed along like this
posted on May 23, 2001 03:44:47 PM
FWIW, hurling accusations against one another and trying to second-guess the other's motives by playing "Thought Police" is really unproductive. Issues cannot be easily boiled down to "one person is lying, the other is telling the truth." More often, both parties are telling the truth as they see it.
My own policy? If I have an unhappy buyer, I request that they return the item for a refund. Period.
Eg, I'm not debating your return policy if you feel strongly that the buyer was wrong. But I have been on the buyer's side of the fence, where I received an item that was clearly defective and I was accused of deliberately sabotaging it. I cannot tell you unprofessional that kind of response is and what a bitter taste it left in my mouth to be accused of such a thing. My advice would be to simply take the high road and issue the refund. Principles? They won't be compromised.
posted on May 23, 2001 03:45:23 PM
Yes, I've identified the auction also. I must say that the pictures are excellent and the description gives complete measurements, so if this is a case of buyer's remorse over size or something, that is really the buyer's problem. The tag also indicates "Dry Clean Only".
I do not see where the suit could have been shipped in a rotten condition, not from the pictures.
Oh, and I checked out EG's feedback (under this ID anyway) and according to the one neg, it's questionable whether or not it was deserved.
The only thing I might suggest is that the All Sales Final might lead unscrupulous buyers to pull this kind of thing rather than try to work things out nicely. Whether it's leaving negs without discussing the matter first or damaging merchandise and accusing the seller of fraud, whatever. You can do what you like, of course, but if you let your customers know that the door isn't closed to further discussion after you ship the item, maybe it might cut down on some hassles?
posted on May 23, 2001 03:48:26 PM
OK, so the two of you are at an impasse.
It will only make your lives more difficult if you continue this. Consider that in the scheme of things it doesn't matter at all! It's consuming your time and emotional energy, and the outcome isn't worth it for either of you. Why not let it drop, or compromise with a resolution?
Logically, there is no reason to destroy a jacket upon receipt, especially when it could have been resold.
ExecGirl, since you do such a high volume of business, isn't it possible that you may have overlooked this, even though you always do your best to check everything over carefully?
Each of you believe you're right, but is being right so important? If you let this get to you for much longer your nerves will be like those frayed buttonholes.
posted on May 23, 2001 03:48:46 PM
I don't know who posted the photos, but why not post all three. All you have to do is go back to page 1 and look at button number two it is frayed as was even mentioned by someone else before I joined the discussion. Lets post all three close-up, just make sure you have all three not just the two good photos. If you can see it on page one not enlarged that is interesting.
posted on May 23, 2001 03:51:48 PM
Personally, I would refuse to refund. If I knew absolutely that the item didn't have that damage going out the door and that the damage could not have been done in shipping, no way.
If damage had occurred during shipping, it wouldn't have been confined to the button holes.
posted on May 23, 2001 03:51:56 PM
>>I know she is a fraud because she told me how well she checked this item out.<<
Huh??
>>She knows what she has done, she's done it before and not refunded money<<
Double huh??
>>There is no case for fraud against me. I have all the proof I need against this seller.<<
She has PICS of a quality item.
You have PICs of damaged goods.
If there is any "proof" here, I believe it is in EG's hands, not yours.
If you are actually responding, my questions regarded:
(1) What were you planning on doing with the info eBay "advised" you to obtain (seems to me they already have that)
and
(2)How do you come to the conclusion that a seller is a fraud because they sell under different ID's?
posted on May 23, 2001 03:53:35 PM
Actally Executive Girl brought this topic to the forum with out my knowledge. I was alerted by someone that this was going on. it is unfair to be discussed without oppurtunity to respond. You are right it is a waste of energy!
posted on May 23, 2001 04:02:18 PM
When she emailed me at first I thought maybe I could have overlooked something. But then when she said "One of the button holes is so frayed it will not even hold the button closed." That sent a warning signal to me...as you can clearly see...all the buttons are closed! When they are closed I also pull the material ever so slightly to take the side measurements..and not once did the button pop open.
************************************
Now, I would REALLY like to resolve this once and for all.
MHillyrd - would you be in agreeance to let the posters on this board decide what we should do?
We can set a time limit and once everyone has voted on what we should do, that's what will be done. If the majority vote that I should refund, then a check will be in tomorrow's mail. If not, then the case will be dropped - by BOTH parties.
The voting will be on:
(1) Should I refund?
(2) If so, how much?
Her bid amount was $10.49, shipping was $5.50 for a grand total of $15.99.
I will only do this if Mhillyrd would agree to let you guys decide what we should do with this transaction.
Edited to add: Only active posters can vote on this, no "new just signed up today" posters!
[ edited by ExecutiveGirl on May 23, 2001 04:06 PM ]
Once more with feeling: Please discuss the topic, not the individual. Insults are a violation of our CGs, and to continue to post in this manner could jeopardize your posting privileges.
posted on May 23, 2001 04:03:28 PM
Okay, all three pics are posted. I can see stitching on the top one and the bottom one but not the 2nd one down.
I already mentioned that I once had a top similar to this and the buttonholes seemed to be stitched through the outside weave of the fabric and then the inside would pull loose, eventually making the whole buttonhole worse. I am only going by my own experience.
posted on May 23, 2001 04:04:54 PM
Hi MHILLYRD, welcome to AuctionWatch - I guess?
I HAVE AN IDEA:
Try to photograph the suit, as closely as possible, the way EG did in the original pictures. If you can duplicate the look, perhaps that would help substantiate your case????
