posted on April 12, 2001 01:05:27 PM new
I got a note from a buyer this morning by snail mail that is simply a copy of the eBay auction page, and a copy of a certificate of expertization. The item is a stamp and the certificate reads "It is genuine, reperforated at the left and with stained perforations at left, the cancel is a genuine "Wheel of Fortune" cancel"
The buyer handwrites "I just received this stamp back from the PF (over 4 mos). Obviously it is not sound. How do you want to handle this?"
I'm not happy at all, but here is my response:
Hello Dr. XXX:
Today's mail brought your copy of the PF certificate.
I do not even have an image of this stamp on the computer any longer. Images are kept for at least 30 to 60 days past closing, but then are deleted. The auction page is also too outdated to access through eBay.
I read the certificate (without photo), in which it states the stamp has "stained" perforations at the left and has been reperforated. Reperfing is an art best detected by experts, and I do not contest their finding. Reperforating is not a defect.
The "staining" part concerns me, for this is not mentioned in the description and nor can I see it in the photocopy you sent. But the copy is not clear and I do not have access to my original scan. If there is a bit of staining from the [original] gum on the perfs this usually can be removed by soaking. As you are certainly aware, the scrutiny of expertization will reveal even the most minute abnormalities in a stamp - period. If the stamp had noticeable staining it would have been so described. Also, I would think that if this "staining" were evident it would have been unsatisfactory upon receipt and returned immediately. An obviously "stained" stamp would surely NOT be submitted for expertization - agree?
This sale was not based on a contingency. There was no request for an extension during the sale nor subsequent to it. As you must be aware, even public auction houses REQUIRE buyers to advise them IN ADVANCE of an extension. They, as myself, are many times obligated to consignors. Even when an extension is requested (and granted), it is for 30 days, with most houses extending the time frame to 60 days upon written notification of a delay in expertising. After 60 days (even with an extension) the sale becomes final. Those are the industry standards. Unless a stamp submitted is a very obscure issue which need be forwarded to overseas authorities, they are returned within that 60 day window. I am amazed the PF retained this stamp for four months, it makes no sense at all. Nevertheless, over five months have elapsed since this sale closed.
I will put the ball back in your court. What do you think is a fair resolution?
posted on April 12, 2001 01:13:45 PM new
A RESOUNDING NO!!!!!, THERE IS TO LONG A GAP IN THE TIME LINE HERE, HE MAY HAVE DAMAGED THE MERCHANDISE, AND NOW KNOWS IT IS EITHER WORTHLESS OR WORTH SIGNIFIGANTLY LESS AND NOW WANTS OUT, CUE SEND LETTER TO YOU, AS HI IM THE GREAT DR. SO AND SO, I HAVE FOUND BULL@#$% TECHNICAL DEFECTS 1-14 AND HAVE WAITED OH 5 MONTHS BECAUSE IM SO IMPORTANT AND HAVE TAKEN 5 MONTHS TO EXAMINE THIS ONE ABSOLUTLY MASTERFUL PIECE OF HISTORY, AND HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT I JUST MUST RETURN IT.
IF YOU WERE HONEST, AND NO INSURANCE IS INVOLVED, YOU DID YOUR JOB, HE HAS THE STAMP....
. DONT REFUND HIM.
.
every 20 seconds in america a woman is giving birth:SHE MUST BE FOUND AND STOPPED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.................................................................
posted on April 12, 2001 01:35:15 PM new
I think your response may be too complex.
I would simply state "we are only permitted to accept returns or make adjustments if the complaint is filed within 60 days of the close of the auction."
posted on April 12, 2001 01:42:24 PM new
I feel that your customer should have arranged this before bidding if he wanted to get it "expertized" and then if you agreed it should have been done in a certain time period.
Five months later I would say no and I would have no trouble saying it. But that's just me.
posted on April 12, 2001 01:50:21 PM new
I agree with unknown, if you plan not to refund. A long letter like that is just begging him to refute your points. Best not to argue. Just a simple no, as per his example, is all that's required.
posted on April 12, 2001 02:00:22 PM new
My gut feeling was also no, and my original reply was very concise. Then I reread it and felt the need to explain....then reread again and think its too curt, etc.
Agreed, the time frame is far, far too long and thats it.
posted on April 12, 2001 02:12:10 PM new
Well, I'm in the minority but I liked your response up until the last sentence. I would have left it with This sale was not based on a contingency.
I certainly wouldn't refund after this many months but if he's a repeat customer or a customer who shells out a lot of bucks, you might consider offering him a discount off your future auctions or other merchandise.
