BST transaction gone very bad with "lost" check

[itjclarke]

I've been delaying posting anything here, since I'd been holding out hope my issue would be easily resolved through my bank's fraud claims department, and with cooperation from the board seller. I also don't really like drama. As is, the seller has gone completely silent over the past 2-3 weeks, ignoring both my emails and direct correspondence from my bank. For now, I am choosing not to out this seller, however if I see he posts anything new for sale, that will probably change.

Here's a quick summary.
Oct 2013- I bought an item from him off BST. Seller requests check or MO. I mail check.
Nov 2013- seller says check has not arrived. Rather than send another check, I pay via Paypal and ask that he void/destroy the check if it arrives.
Nov 2013- I receive the item
Dec 2014- 14 months after the "lost check" is written, it is cashed or deposited.

Immediately after discovering this transaction has gone through, I contacted my bank and the seller. He responded 4-5 times to my initial email, claiming not to have known anything about the check, claiming to be totally trustworthy... however saying he was not at all surprised this had happened, saying his actual sig would not look like the one on the back of the check (no one had even told him the check had been endorsed), and that it was completely my responsibility for not "cancelling" the check.

His responses were strange to me, especially his not being surprised. I know if I had sold a large dollar item, I'd very surprised and worried that someone had ended up with my mail and cashed a check in my name over a year later. Being innocent, I'd go out of my way to cooperate. I was also annoyed by his pushing any/all responsibility on to me, since he'd requested payment by check and since my bank Wells Fargo doesn't really allow me to cancel checks. You pay $32 for a 6 month renewable hold, but it does not actually cancel the check. I've also since learned (and was surprised) checks do not technically expire over time. Some banks may choose not to accept checks that are 6 months old as being "stale", however it seems many, if not most will accept years old checks indefinitely. In this case, Citizen's Bank happily accepted a 14 month old check without question. After the 6 month, $32 hold expires, you owe another $32 if you want the hold to continue for 6 more months, and this can go on forever. It would have cost $96 to protect myself for the 14 months. Knowing what I know now, I will probably never again consider a seller (BST or AH) that requests a check in lieu of an instant Paypal, Wire or CC payment.

My honest, initial reaction to all this was that it seemed far far more likely that the payee/seller was involved, since he has access to his own bank cards, IDs, account numbers... whereas if a random person had received this check, they'd likely need to falsify and/or steal all that info. That said, I tried to consider the possibility he was not involved, and if he were to have shown good communication/cooperation, it would have probably made me give him benefit of the doubt.

Since those initial 4-5 emails however, I think he's responded to 1 or 2 of my 10+ emails and been silent for nearly 3 weeks. With that, I've become fairly certain he's involved given how uncooperative and plain shady he's been--- ex: I sent him an affidavit for check fraud that he needed to sign and mail in. I sent the form with a pre-addressed and stamped evenlope so it would be easy, but he told me his lawyer and a Wells banker had told him this form should never have been sent to him, and that the bank took it from him and "destroyed" it! WTF?!?!?:eek: My bank's fraud investigator said a branch teller should have never said or done anything like this and asked me to get the branch's location from him. He did not respond to that question, nor has he responded since. This was 3 weeks ago. My bank has since sent him the same form directly, but as far as I can tell he's ignoring the process.

I don't want to get into much more detail, including steps I'm currently and will be taking, as this process is ongoing... however I want to get others' feedback, mainly- would you think the seller is likely involved... and has anyone experienced a similar form of theft and/or fraud, if so, how did it turn out? I don't want to broadcast too much to this guy, so if there are any specific tactics you think I should take, etc, feel free to email me directly at itjclarke@yahoo.com

In posting, I would also like to compel this seller to do what he should be doing here and actually respond and do what the bank is asking. His silence is definitely not the way to earn benefit of the doubt IMO.

[bnorth]

Sorry to hear of your problem Ian, hope it works out for you. Please don't take it out on all us payment Through The Mail people. I have made over 100 transactions on Net54 by check/cash with 0 problems.

[DeanH3]

Man that stinks Ian. I do wish I had something helpful for you. Good luck and I hope this gets worked out for you soon.

[Brian Van Horn]

Ian,

Sorry to hear about the check situation, but two questions:

1. I am not meaning to offend you, but why didn't you put a stop payment on the initial check?

2. 14 months after the fact, the check was cashed? Most banks, if I am not mistaken, will not cash a check after 180 days following the date on the check.

[bn2cardz]

Ian,

Sorry to hear about the check situation, but two questions:

1. I am not meaning to offend you, but why didn't you put a stop payment on the initial check?

2. 14 months after the fact, the check was cashed? Most banks, if I am not mistaken, will not cash a check after 180 days following the date on the check.

Both of the questions were answered in the initial post:

my bank Wells Fargo doesn't really allow me to cancel checks. You pay $32 for a 6 month renewable hold, but it does not actually cancel the check. I've also since learned (and was surprised) checks do not technically expire over time. Some banks may choose not to accept checks that are 6 months old as being "stale", however it seems many, if not most will accept years old checks indefinitely. In this case, Citizen's Bank happily accepted a 14 month old check without question. After the 6 month, $32 hold expires, you owe another $32 if you want the hold to continue for 6 more months, and this can go on forever. It would have cost $96 to protect myself for the 14 months.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Sorry to hear about your problem. Don't beat yourself up - you did nothing wrong.

I disgaree with not outing the seller, as it beneifts those of us who buy quite a bit on the B/S/T. However, that is your decision and I resepct it.

I hope it works out for you. Good luck!

[D. Bergin]

Sorry this happened to you. I did not know that detail about banks not actually cancelling checks and extorting the process for perpetuity. That seems downright illegal, but then again the banks & CC companies have pretty much been given a blank check (pun intended), to do whatever the hell they want to do in the last 20 years or so.

[Runscott]

Ian, you know my thoughts on this, but posting to show my support.

As far as outing the guy, I wouldn't normally recommend it as it just leads to a lot of drama, but your bases are covered and this is a significant issue - possibly the worst I've seen on an internet forum transaction. I don't think he realizes how well-respected you are, and that you are one of the least-likely people to start a thread like this, meaning it's a big deal and thread-worthy by anyone's standards.

Personally, at this point I would fry him alive.

[slipk1068]

Ian, you know my thoughts on this, but posting to show my support.

As far as outing the guy, I wouldn't normally recommend it as it just leads to a lot of drama, but your bases are covered and this is a significant issue - possibly the worst I've seen on an internet forum transaction. I don't think he realizes how well-respected you are, and that you are one of the least-likely people to start a thread like this, meaning it's a big deal and thread-worthy by anyone's standards.

Personally, at this point I would fry him alive.

This seems like a great way to use my 500th post.

+1

[Brian Van Horn]

Both of the questions were answered in the initial post:

My apologies. I was just skimming the article. Leave it to a bank to come up with a renewable charge to stop a check.

[Leon]

For the record I have been involved in this and the seller went silent on me too, however, I didn't push it because I know Ian is working on some stuff. I am helping Ian as much as I can but there isn't a ton I can do. It seems to me if this was a legit "I really didn't cash it" then the seller would not only be helping when asked, but would be very PROACTIVE, since he is being held accountable for something someone else allegedly did.

[oldjudge]

Do you know the branch that the check was cashed/deposit in? If so, I would call them and tell them that the check had been fraudulently cashed and ask them to pull the camera tapes. If these tapes are still available, this will disclose who did this. Also, report this fraud to your bank. They will reimburse your funds if the check was in fact fraudulently cashed. If the seller really cashed it himself he will have more problems than the money he made was worth.

[Exhibitman]

I have extensive work experience chasing financial fraudsters [NOT saying that there is fraud here, just providing a frame of reference for my suggestion]. The nice thing about checks is that they leave an auditable trail. Get a copy of the front and back of your cashed check. When you deposit a check the bank stamps it with information that can be reviewed to determine where it was deposited. If it went into an account that has nothing to do with the seller or originated from a place like a check cashing service that is not where the seller is located odds are the check was stolen and cashed by a third party and the seller really is innocent.

The law is stacked 100% in favor of the banks when it comes to checking accounts:

1. Banks do not have to dishonor a check you write just because you tell them it was stolen or lost. I just had to put one on a check at WFB [$31 for 6 months] but it is ineffective if the check is cashed anywhere other than at a branch of your bank. If the check is presented for deposit and sent to your bank while a hold is in effect it will be rejected, but that's the end of the protection.

2. Banks are not liable for not catching a stale check--or any other SNAFU or breach of their own account rules--if they have 'reasonable' methods in place to administer the account and one happens to slip through. That is in the Uniform Commercial Code, which has been adopted in nearly every state in some form. And you thought Little League was the last time in life you get a trophy for trying...

3. If the bank sends you a statement every month you may have as little as 30 days to catch even the most egregious fraud/bank error or the bank may not have liability for your losses. A client of mine recently caught an ex-employee embezzling funds over nearly three years by using a fraudulent transfer instruction and the bank was liable for just the prior month's unauthorized transaction.

[chris6net]

I don't post often and I may be wrong but why bring this up without alerting us who the seller is. I buy things on the B/S/T and would be pissed off if this happened to me when I could have been warned about this person prior.
Just my opinion.
CN

[111gecko]

This is ridiculous. 14 months later and it is cashed?..If I am the buyer I post everything and let the seller defend himself. If he didn't do it the fraud department will reimburse immediately and investigate from there.....I have done lots of BST deals and this has never happened. This a fraternity of a group here and this can't happen. Post it and let's see how quickly it gets handled.

[pariah1107]

Great info Adam!

Very sorry to hear of this trouble Ian. Straight theft IMO, that's frustrating to read how little recourse a victim has in cases of bank/check fraud. Good advice all.

[itjclarke]

I don't post often and I may be wrong but why bring this up without alerting us who the seller is. I buy things on the B/S/T and would be pissed off if this happened to me when I could have been warned about this person prior.
Just my opinion.
CN

Thanks for the feedback all.. I'm in midst of a pretty busy week, so will add more comment(s) later. To the above question--- if I see he posts an item for sale, I'll out it/him. I have no idea what his usernames may be on eBay or elsewhere, so I probably can't warn anyone beyond potential BST sales.

I'd very much love for this guy to reach out and begin cooperating. If not, I'll go as far as I need to go to see this through.

[Luke]

I'm with Scott on this one. I don't have any knowledge beyond what you just wrote, but you're one of the most trustworthy people on here imo. If your gut instinct says this guy is responsible, he very likely is. I would probably hold off on naming names if you have any lawyers involved (or if you plan to have any involved). If not, or when the time is right, I do think he should be outed. This is awful. I hope you get it resolved favorably and in a timely manner.

[Gobucsmagic74]

Sorry to hear of all this Ian. I sincerely hope there is some quick resolution to this as you are truly one of the good guys.

[Rich Klein]

What if it was an honest slip up

I had a check in my wallet for 60 days before I did a search and found the darn check in my wallet, In this case, the item was paid for by the collector and he owned said item. It was me who forgot for 60 days to deposit.

It happens, just a thought and you should see some of what occurs to checks were I work:

We get checks that are not signed, made out to the wrong payee, not made out to any payee, wrong amounts, etc. We even once had a check made out to 250 -- and why -- because the fee was $250 and they wrote that as the pay to the order of.

Things happen!

Rich

[Centauri]

Ian,

This may be of little solace, but a similar thing happened at my company - We paid a vendor by check, vendor claimed he didn't receive it, we sent a second check and placed a bank hold on the first check. The second check was cashed immediately. 7 months later, the first check was cashed. This is how I discovered the 6 month limit on a bank hold, and the unwillingness of the banks to deal with it after that.

We are still working with our bank and the other bank to try and recover the funds. $11,000 outstanding.

Banksters.

[earlywynnfan]

What if it was an honest slip up

I had a check in my wallett for 60 days before I did a search and found the darn check in my wallet, In this case, the item was paid for by the collector and he owned said item. It was me who forgot for 60 days to deposit.

It happens, just a thought and you should see some of what occurs to checks were I work:

We get checks that are not signed, made out to the wrong payee, not made out to any payee, wrong amounts, etc. We even once had a check made out to 250 -- and why -- because the fee was $250 and they wrote that as the pay to the order of.

Things happen!

Rich

But if that buyer emailed you and asked why you hadn't cashed his check, would you dodge?


Like all, I'm unbelievably curious as to who this is, but I agree with someone above me. If this was a typical "I had a crappy transaction with --" then I'd say publish his name, but this sounds like the authorities need to be involved, in which case I'd hold on to the name. (Until it's all cleared up, then you must post it!!)

Ken

[earlywynnfan]

Ian,

This may be of little solace, but a similar thing happened at my company - We paid a vendor by check, vendor claimed he didn't receive it, we sent a second check and placed a bank hold on the first check. The second check was cashed immediately. 7 months later, the first check was cashed. This is how I discovered the 6 month limit on a bank hold, and the unwillingness of the banks to deal with it after that.

We are still working with our bank and the other bank to try and recover the funds. $11,000 outstanding.

Banksters.

To someone with no business banking experience, can you please explain why isn't this easily provable fraud??

[D. Bergin]

I guess that banks have decided since they don't get a piece of the transaction on most checks, like they do on credit cards (and they are all in the credit card business now), outside of managing the account. They couldn't care less about whether they've passed a bad check, except to string you along for fees on a hold.

[CardboardCollector]

Since the check was mailed, could this be considered mail fraud?

[1963Topps Set]

I believe it could only be mail fraud if the check was intercepted before delivery and cashed by someone else. By the way, I am sorry if I missed this, but how much was the check made out for?

[Rollingstone206]

...

[1952boyntoncollector]

without naming the seller...I really take any complaining with a grain of salt...the seller could defend themselves....easy to just say what the seller did was bad and tell your side of the story if you know there is no chance there will be another version of the story.....by not naming the seller that assures you of that..

[steve_a]

The OP gave enough info for those who really want to find out who the seller is.

[Runscott]

without naming the seller...I really take any complaining with a grain of salt...the seller could defend themselves....easy to just say what the seller did was bad and tell your side of the story if you know there is no chance there will be another version of the story.....by not naming the seller that assures you of that..

This response is moronic, especially the last bit of your single sentence.

[1952boyntoncollector]

This response is moronic, especially the last bit of your single sentence.


well there has been no response....not sure how its moronic if its true........easy to make accusations when no one there to defend them..... plus I said I would take what is said with a grain of salt....not so sure why you would have such a strong reaction to that..i didn't say didn't believe etc..

[Runscott]

well there has been no response....not sure how its moronic if its true........easy to make accusations when no one there to defend them..... plus I said I would take what is said with a grain of salt....not so sure why you would have such a strong reaction to that..i didn't say didn't believe etc..

Okay, it took me 10 seconds to read your first response, deem it 'moronic' and type my response. I apologize for calling your comment 'moronic', as I know you aren't a moron, but this is a serious situation and worthy of a little bit more thought.

Ian has gotten screwed. He has described the situation in detail. The accused knows Ian's handle, as he made the deal here...duh....and how in the world would 'no response' indicate that the accused is '[not] here to defend them'?!? The accused has ignored both Ian AND Leon and now he is ignoring them again. Please - read the posts before jumping in half-cocked. This is a serious situation.

[Jobu]

Ian, I am sorry to hear that you got screwed out of what sounds like it might be a significant amount of money. At least it seems that you received the item you paid twice for (and I hope this doesn't wreck that item for you).

I am curious about the last time that this person logged in to Net54 (you can see this by looking at their profile) - have you checked? Also, have you tried calling the seller? It seems like a lot of this has happened over email (Leon, do you have a phone number for all users?).

I know that I would like to know who this seller is so I am in favor of your outing them so that others can use extra caution in deals with them. However, I also understand your desire not to completely blow things up.

I have another possible suggestion that I will send you in a PM in case the seller is reading.

Good luck.

[itjclarke]

Okay, it took me 10 seconds to read your first response, deem it 'moronic' and type my response. I apologize for calling your comment 'moronic', as I know you aren't a moron, but this is a serious situation and worthy of a little bit more thought.

Ian has gotten screwed. He has described the situation in detail. The accused knows Ian's handle, as he made the deal here...duh....and how in the world would 'no response' indicate that the accused is '[not] here to defend them'?!? The accused has ignored both Ian AND Leon and now he is ignoring them again. Please - read the posts before jumping in half-cocked. This is a serious situation.

Thanks Scott, I couldn't have said it better. Jake, I don't really mind if you take it with a grain of salt or not, it's not gonna change how I approach this. Just curious, why do you think you need to know? Are you going to do anything to help? As said, if I see him selling ANYTHING else, I will post his username, so others will be warned. I don't want to start a needless witch hunt though, nor do I want this discussion to devolve. I'd prefer things stay civilized, and hope to get some good ideas/input. I've really appreciated feedback received so far.

He is not defenseless. As Scott says, if he sees this thread, he'll know it's about our bad deal, and would have a chance to speak up. I hope he does break his silence and posts here, since something would be better than nothing, right? I'm definitely not fully opposed to naming the seller (a handful of people I trust do know), I just don't see anything to gain by calling him out publicly here and now. I see he has not been logged on for 3 days, but I know he's on the board regularly. Given he's ignored my emails, I hope he eventually sees this thread and contacts me. From there, a very specific chain of events would need to take place, and a chain in which I believe beyond doubt he's not involved. This being said, I think it's unlikely to play out this way (everyone I've spoken with, including law enforcement believe he is involved), but there's still that 1% chance, right? If in the end, it's not totally clear he's not involved, I'll let everyone know who this is.


I have extensive work experience chasing financial fraudsters [NOT saying that there is fraud here, just providing a frame of reference for my suggestion]. The nice thing about checks is that they leave an auditable trail. Get a copy of the front and back of your cashed check. When you deposit a check the bank stamps it with information that can be reviewed to determine where it was deposited. If it went into an account that has nothing to do with the seller or originated from a place like a check cashing service that is not where the seller is located odds are the check was stolen and cashed by a third party and the seller really is innocent.

The law is stacked 100% in favor of the banks when it comes to checking accounts:

1. Banks do not have to dishonor a check you write just because you tell them it was stolen or lost. I just had to put one on a check at WFB [$31 for 6 months] but it is ineffective if the check is cashed anywhere other than at a branch of your bank. If the check is presented for deposit and sent to your bank while a hold is in effect it will be rejected, but that's the end of the protection.

2. Banks are not liable for not catching a stale check--or any other SNAFU or breach of their own account rules--if they have 'reasonable' methods in place to administer the account and one happens to slip through. That is in the Uniform Commercial Code, which has been adopted in nearly every state in some form. And you thought Little League was the last time in life you get a trophy for trying...

3. If the bank sends you a statement every month you may have as little as 30 days to catch even the most egregious fraud/bank error or the bank may not have liability for your losses. A client of mine recently caught an ex-employee embezzling funds over nearly three years by using a fraudulent transfer instruction and the bank was liable for just the prior month's unauthorized transaction.

Adam, thanks for clearly summarizing. I've learned these things over the past 2 months+ and am appalled. I always thought Paypal gift/friends family was the riskiest way to go, but now knowing how many loose ends there are when writing a personal check, I'm re-assessing. At least Paypal doesn't allow the seller the ability to say "I didn't get it". I guess I could've sent the check with tracking, but frankly had never worried too much about checks... nor had I worried about longtime BST sellers. All my other dozens of BST transactions have gone without issue, and several times I've remained in contact with sellers just because they're nice guys.

That said, I guess it all boils down to trusting the seller. I wouldn't worry about Scott or Dan trying to screw me over a lost check. This incident doesn't affect trust earned by many of the sellers here, nor the AHs I've had great experiences with--- LOTG, B&L, Sterling, JVAC, to name a few.

Sorry to hear of your problem Ian, hope it works out for you. Please don't take it out on all us payment Through The Mail people. I have made over 100 transactions on Net54 by check/cash with 0 problems.

Ben, sorry if I came across as taking it out on sellers. Honestly, I have become a little bitter towards banks and their loose/inconsistent policies, but I in no way think sellers who require checks/MO are trying to screw people. I do think most/many however are not fully aware of how non-secure personal checking can be.

Almost everyone I've talked to, including my wife and the police have told me with "near certainty" some variation on there being a fixed term of validity for old checks... all, with exception of a couple (posters here) have thought checks are no good after a certain period-- 90 days, 180 days, 12 months, etc ("after 14 months?? no that can't happen, it's no good after 6 mths", etc). Until this happened, I'd have thought the same as the others.

I'd never considered this topic worrisome until now. I'd guess I've got a half dozen "lost" checks out there over a 20+ year period. I don't remember any specifically, but any of them could come back to bite me.

What if it was an honest slip up


Rich, I always appreciate an opposing POV, always better to understand multiple perspectives. I also sort of misspoke in my first post. My first impression was not that he'd done something bad. My first impression was that he had probably received the check sometime after I sent my paypal money, then lost it in a pile. He then found it a year later, forgetting what it was for (though I did write the player name on it) and happily deposited it at Christmas to help offset holiday spending. I emailed him, fully expecting he'd done this by mistake, though admittedly I did take an urgent tone because my rent was due in 4 days and this amount had sucked my checking account dry. After his first round of responses, I became highly suspicious though. There are other small details I didn't bother to mention that were also suspicious, and the stuff he claimed about a supposed bank teller confiscating the affidavit form was just ridiculous.

This may be of little solace, but a similar thing happened at my company - We paid a vendor by check, vendor claimed he didn't receive it, we sent a second check and placed a bank hold on the first check. The second check was cashed immediately. 7 months later, the first check was cashed. This is how I discovered the 6 month limit on a bank hold....

Ben, thanks for posting. I'd hoped a similar story would surface. I'll shoot you an email as I'm curious to know tactics your company is taking, and how things are playing out.

Jobu, he last logged onto the site on 2/9. I do have his phone number and called, as has my bank's investigator.

BTW- I think this would be hard for anyone to track down. I did not post at all in his sale thread, as communications were by PM and email only... so if you look back at my posting history it will probably lead you in the wrong direction, and to transactions done around the same time with Dan (Gobucsmagic), Brad Pencil, etc. Those were great transactions, and I don't want anyone forming conclusions about the wrong people. Again, if he posts an item for sale on BST, I'll give fair warning to any perspective buyers.

[Bored5000]

I am really sorry to read something like this. Hope the OP gets restitution for his loss. :(

[bobfreedman]

Can you go to PayPal and ask them to refund your money that you paid for the second time and open a case with them? I apologize if this is an obvious question and that I do not see the obvious answer? Thanks and good luck

[itjclarke]

Can you go to PayPal and ask them to refund your money that you paid for the second time and open a case with them? I apologize if this is an obvious question and that I do not see the obvious answer? Thanks and good luck

Thanks for the thought Bob. I actually hadn't even considered contacting them since payment was by "gift", but another member also suggested this by PM. It's worth a shot, and I'm not going to overlook anything that may help the cause.

[Rollingstone206]

...

[chris6net]

Ian
I rarely post on this board but I log in several times every day and have been involved in the Hobby for almost 40 years and don't know why you don't tell this board who you have this problem with. From what you have posted I am 100% behind you but I am bothered that you have revealed this seller to a few but not all.
I am just worried as someone in the Hobby that this can happen to me and it could have been avoided. If you revealed the name to 6 people why not reveal it to the rest just to protect us and if it turns out to be a mistake which I doubt just let us know
CN

[Tao_Moko]

This is an unfortunate example of our b/s/t. I hope that it doesn't put a stain on what is one of the best card transaction forums ever. If you don't use pp servives or goods then you are at some risk with a new seller. We all know that.

I have an Advantage account with BOA and they did not charge me to stop payment the last time I needed to but the six month rule still applied. If you report the check "stolen", different story.

[itjclarke]

Chris, PM sent detailing my reasoning. As said, I will give fair warning if I see he posts anything for sale here, and may very well identify him if he does not begin cooperating immediately and in earnest. As the politicians like to say however, "I want to give diplomacy a chance", and no matter what, I want to make sure I cover all my bases before doing so.

Brian, it's a very large amount for me.. 4 figures. I'd prefer leave it at that.

This is an unfortunate example of our b/s/t. I hope that it doesn't put a stain on what is one of the best card transaction forums ever. If you don't use pp servives or goods then you are at some risk with a new seller. We all know that.

I have an Advantage account with BOA and they did not charge me to stop payment the last time I needed to but the six month rule still applied. If you report the check "stolen", different story.

I'm curious Eric, how do you go about reporting a check as stolen? I'm sure all this is too late in my case, nor did I have any reason to truly think the check was stolen back in 2013, but I'm curious to know how you prove that, and how it's handled differently? If stolen, will they truly cancel the check? I saw on line that B of A charges about the same as Wells for a 6 month hold, so they must have waived the fees, right?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Ian
I rarely post on this board but I log in several times every day and have been involved in the Hobby for almost 40 years and don't know why you don't tell this board who you have this problem with. From what you have posted I am 100% behind you but I am bothered that you have revealed this seller to a few but not all.
I am just worried as someone in the Hobby that this can happen to me and it could have been avoided. If you revealed the name to 6 people why not reveal it to the rest just to protect us and if it turns out to be a mistake which I doubt just let us know
CN

+1

plus the seller could use a different handle on another board in which you are not a member and cant warn anyone if he ever tries to sell again.......if we knew the name of the actual individual we could avoid being potentially ripped off....if you don't disclose the name and you are 100% sure of the facts you have stated, I really don't understand why the drama in not sharing the name with the community..otherwise you are allowing for other victims, and if your facts are inaccurate the seller can defend himself......seems like a win win..

[Runscott]

This is a big deal to the seller, as it's going to get nasty for him at some point, so I'm sure he's reading these posts - he doesn't have to be logged on to do so.

But he does have to be logged on in order to create ads in the B/S/T, and Ian is watching to see if he logs on, so those who can't seem to exist without knowing the person's name, can rest easy and concentrate on giving advice if they have any.

[AustinMike]

Ian, sorry to hear about this situation. I'm astounded that a 14 month old check could still be deposited/cashed. I agree with you, the fact that he did not sign and return the affidavit makes me seriously doubt his innocence. I, like many others, would like him to be outed. However, I understand your reasons for not doing so and I agree that outing him if he posts an item on B/S/T is an appropriate safeguard. Lastly, just because he has not signed in for 3 days does not mean he hasn't read this thread. He can read it without signing in.

[packs]

Do you have it in writing that he claims not to have signed or deposited the check? If you do, the bank should offer fraud protection against your transactions. And if he says in writing he did not cash the check, that should be proof of fraud. It would be no different than if someone opened my mail and took a check I made out to the cable company and cashed it into their account.

[1952boyntoncollector]

This is a big deal to the seller, as it's going to get nasty for him at some point, so I'm sure he's reading these posts - he doesn't have to be logged on to do so.

But he does have to be logged on in order to create ads in the B/S/T, and Ian is watching to see if he logs on, so those who can't seem to exist without knowing the person's name, can rest easy and concentrate on giving advice if they have any.


The seller can do this alleged fraud on other boards that IAN isn't on...without the sellers name he can basically stop his business on net54 and get victims on other boards....if don't know his name

[Runscott]

How about you just don't pay for large transactions with checks for a while?

You'll be okay buddy, and meanwhile, Ian can continue working on this in the manner that he thinks best. I can assure you he's given this a lot of thought and when he's ready to post dollar amounts and names he will do so.

You yourself said that this is a one-sided story, so why do you feel it's Ian's job to protect the world from someone who hasn't even voiced his side of the story yet? Don't you think such a crusade would is a bit premature?

[batsballsbases]

How about you just don't pay for large transactions with checks for a while?

You'll be okay buddy, and meanwhile, Ian can continue working on this in the manner that he thinks best. I can assure you he's given this a lot of thought and when he's ready to post dollar amounts and names he will do so.

You yourself said that this is a one-sided story, so why do you feel it's Ian's job to protect the world from someone who hasn't even voiced his side of the story yet? Don't you think such a crusade would is a bit premature?

Scott,
It is a one sided story so far Ians Side. (and granted he my be completly right) BUT in my opinion its a bit premature to come and post up something like this and not have waited until there was a final outcome. I.E. police,bank,return of money etc. Its the old carrot in front of the donkey ,Here is the story But Im not going to tell you who it is until BLAH ,BLAH ,BLAH . Of course people waht to know who it is ,is just human nature. Difference with you is you know who it is! Makes it much easier when a select few have that information and not everyone. My feeling is Ian should have waited until there was a final outcome either positive or negative to post up something like this. Just my nickels worth!

[Runscott]

Scott,
It is a one sided story so far Ians Side. (and granted he my be completly right) BUT in my opinion its a bit premature to come and post up something like this and not have waited until there was a final outcome. I.E. police,bank,return of money etc. Its the old carrot in front of the donkey ,Here is the story But Im not going to tell you who it is until BLAH ,BLAH ,BLAH . Of course people waht to know who it is ,is just human nature. Difference with you is you know who it is! Makes it much easier when a select few have that information and not everyone. My feeling is Ian should have waited until there was a final outcome either positive or negative to post up something like this. Just my nickels worth!

Al, what you say makes perfect sense. I think some might be missing his motive for posting here: he is trying to arrive at a final outcome and thinks this will help, both in terms of gathering advice he hadn't thought of and getting the accused to step forward.

Some people post such things to sway opinion or to blow off steam. That isn't the case here.

[batsballsbases]

Al, what you say makes perfect sense. I think some might be missing his motive for posting here: he is trying to arrive at a final outcome and thinks this will help, both in terms of gathering advice he hadn't thought of and getting the accused to step forward.

Some people post such things to sway opinion or to blow off steam. That isn't the case here.

Thankyou Scott,
And yes I do understand that he is trying to find out some information on how to proceed. Even some of the information posted opened my eyes to not knowing how the banks worked with respect to checks and time in cashing them. I assume that this was at least a four figure transaction and not something like $50.00. But in saying that I think at some point in time Ian outs the person involved as to save other board members the same plight that he has suffered weather it be now or after this ever gets resolved. The whole point of this board most times is to alert people about I.E. Bad cards on ebay, Bad items, people who dont pay, etc. This case is no different. We post ebay (handles) names all the time so why would this be different. If you want to live by the sword then you should die by the sword!

[vintagetoppsguy]

I think some might be missing his motive for posting here: he is trying to arrive at a final outcome and thinks this will help, both in terms of gathering advice he hadn't thought of and getting the accused to step forward.

Some people post such things to sway opinion or to blow off steam. That isn't the case here.

Exactly! He would like to have the seller step up and do the right thing. I think by posting what he did, he let's the seller know that he's serious about the situation and is willing to out him if it's not resolved. He's giving the seller an opportunity to do the right thing. Read his last statement in the original post:

In posting, I would also like to compel this seller to do what he should be doing here and actually respond and do what the bank is asking.

[Rollingstone206]

...

[rajah424]

I move often for work so I lose stuff all the time. A few years ago i found a pay check that was 6 years old (yes, I know i'm an idiot). I went to a BOA to see if there was anything i could do to cash or deposit it. The teller told me he couldn't accept it because it was so old but told me to deposit it at an ATM and it would be cleared undetected. I deposited it that night and the funds were available 3 days later no problem.

[itjclarke]

Scott/David- thanks guys, you're dead on with my intention and my goals in starting the thread. Posting to the board was definitely not something I wanted to do, but after 2 months+ yielded minimal results with the other person, I saw this as a next logical step. I also have no idea how long a true "outcome" will take, so I didn't want to wait silently until 2016, or whenever.

So far this thread has accomplished a few things.
- it's given me piece of mind re-affirming I'm not off base in my suspicions.
- it's provided me with a few ideas I had not considered (thanks to those who have posted or PMd)
- and within a very short period of time, it will show me whether this whole process needs to take the next step... or alternately, whether this person will reappear, either publicly here, or directly to me/my bank and begin cooperating.

Point noted, that he could be reading this while not logged in.. thanks.


I move often for work so I lose stuff all the time. A few years ago i found a pay check that was 6 years old (yes, I know i'm an idiot). I went to a BOA to see if there was anything i could do to cash or deposit it. The teller told me he couldn't accept it because it was so old but told me to deposit it at an ATM and it would be cleared undetected. I deposited it that night and the funds were available 3 days later no problem.

This is such a great example of how inconsistent this all is. Wells Fargo said their tellers are supposed to reject 6 month old checks as stale.. however, my guess is they can still be deposited in an ATM like your example, and done so without signing. And as shown here several, if not most banks will accept checks indefinitely without question, and the issuing bank has no real ability to stop this.

[egbeachley]

Yes, written checks are never officially "stale". I have also found small paychecks over 5 years old and deposited them with no problem. If you write a check that goes missing, your only safe recourse is to close the account.

As for Stop Payments, as others have said they are only good for 6 months and then you have to pay another fee for another 6 months. And so on. For large checks people sometimes do a Stop Payment twice, but rarely more than that. That's why you often see them deposited 13-14 months after getting "lost". It's not forgetfulness, it's a scam.

https://watchdognation.com/stop-payment-check-scam/

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060601/031244.shtml

One thing you can do is write "Void in 180 days" on all checks. Then a stop payment only needs to be done once.

[vintagetoppsguy]

One thing you can do is write "Void in 180 days" on all checks. Then a stop payment only needs to be done once.

Thanks for the tip. I never thought of that. Instead of writing it though, I may have a stamp printed and just stamp all my checks in the future.

I wonder if you could get the check company to print that on there?

[Theo_450]

Those who are complaining that Ian won't out the suspect need to take a step back. He is handling this how he deems the best, and that is his perogative.

Given that the matter is unresolved and has the potential for legal action, I fully agree with Ian's discretion.

Obvious things to do:
Print and scan all sent and recieved emails from seller, banks, authorities.
Start a journal documenting with as much detail as you can remember about every aspect of the transaction and interactions with all involved parties. Details will get fuzzy over time, documentation is critical.

I hope that it works out in your favor Ian.

[freakhappy]

Ian...sorry you have to go through all of this. It sounds like you are doing everything in your power to try to get things to sway the way they should have all along. It's unfortunate that a longstanding board member would do something like this...just sad.

I'm happy to see board members helping you out and giving you some good info. This board is full of great people and most of us help out when we see a member in need.

Good luck, friend!

[chris6net]

Those who are complaining that Ian won't out the suspect need to take a step back. He is handling this how he deems the best, and that is his perogative.

Given that the matter is unresolved and has the potential for legal action, I fully agree with Ian's discretion.

Obvious things to do:
Print and scan all sent and recieved emails from seller, banks, authorities.
Start a journal documenting with as much detail as you can remember about every aspect of the transaction and interactions with all involved parties. Details will get fuzzy over time, documentation is critical.

I hope that it works out in your favor Ian.

I was one of the complainers yesterday and have softened my stance a little today. What I was mainly upset about was that this person was already outed to a select few and there is a good chance he is still selling cards somewhere just not on this board.
I wish Ian luck and am totally on his side but I don't like when someone is outed to a few and others are kept in the dark as this is a great Hobby and unscrupulous people should be outed to all. I only buy and not as often as I like but I am taking some time off from buying until I hear good news from Ian.
CN

[jcmtiger]

I'm done, let me know via pm when the person is identified or resolution is complete.:confused:

Joe

[the 'stache]

Yes, written checks are never officially "stale". I have also found small paychecks over 5 years old and deposited them with no problem. If you write a check that goes missing, your only safe recourse is to close the account.

As for Stop Payments, as others have said they are only good for 6 months and then you have to pay another fee for another 6 months. And so on. For large checks people sometimes do a Stop Payment twice, but rarely more than that. That's why you often see them deposited 13-14 months after getting "lost". It's not forgetfulness, it's a scam.

https://watchdognation.com/stop-payment-check-scam/

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060601/031244.shtml

One thing you can do is write "Void in 180 days" on all checks. Then a stop payment only needs to be done once.

Eric, this is a wonderful post. I didn't know that a stop payment was only good for six months. Nor did I know you could write "void after 180 days" on a personal check. I've never really thought about that, but it makes good sense, as I've seen so many businesses do this.

Thank you!

Those who are complaining that Ian won't out the suspect need to take a step back. He is handling this how he deems the best, and that is his perogative.

Given that the matter is unresolved and has the potential for legal action, I fully agree with Ian's discretion.

Obvious things to do:
Print and scan all sent and recieved emails from seller, banks, authorities.
Start a journal documenting with as much detail as you can remember about every aspect of the transaction and interactions with all involved parties. Details will get fuzzy over time, documentation is critical.

I hope that it works out in your favor Ian.

Ted, this is an excellent suggestion. I'm sure Ian has been taking detailed notes, and keeping a running paper trail of all pertinent communications.

By the way, guys, put me in the camp with those who think Ian is handling this the right way. I'm sure all of us would like to know who the board member is that's causng this issue. In time, if it's not resolved, we will know. I think that exercising discretion here is the way to go. In detailing what has happened, Ian has raised everybody's awareness when dealing on the BST. Without knowing who this person is, and how it was ultimately resolved, I will think twice about sending a personal check for anything (unless it is somebody I know well). Otherwise, I'll choose Paypal. He's also made it quite clear the steps he is taking to resolve this, so hopefully seeing this on the board will motivate the other member to resolve this amicably.

Ian is one of the most trustworthy members of the forum, and he's taking every step possible to move this to a resolution while still giving the other member the opportunity to right the ship, so to speak. With Leon involved, too, I'm sure things are going on behind the scenes that we are not privy to.

I understand the concern that this person might be trying to trade on other sports card forums, possibly with a different name. I would ask Leon if he has any contacts at the CU board, Sportscardforum, Blowout, etc that he might give a heads up to, without outing the person directly to the public?

Good luck, brother! I hope this ends soon, and the resolution is to your satisfaction. You need to be made whole. I know, too, this has to have put a damper on your enjoyment of the hobby, and I hate seeing that. I know how much you love collecting.

[1952boyntoncollector]

(Ted, this is an excellent suggestion. I'm sure Ian has been taking detailed notes, and keeping a running paper trail of all pertinent communications.

By the way, guys, put me in the camp with those who think Ian is handling this the right way. I'm sure all of us would like to know who the board member is that's causng this issue.---- In time, if it's not resolved, we will know. ---)

That's my point, what if nothing happens, nothing is resolved...you say 'we will know' in time......if he never discloses the name 'in time'..lets say 6 months..and another victim occurs...its really not fair to that victim....the seller could be doing other types of scams on other boards...that's why the identity is important.....it appears on your message..even though you agree the seller is not disclosed...that 'in time' you agree the name should be disclosed if the issue is not resolved.......it doesn't appear the name will ever be disclosed no matter how much time passes....and new victims potentially occur...that's my point..

It seems everyone agrees with me now that it doesn't matter if he doesn't post B/S/T here anymore because he can get other victims on other boards...so I don't see that argument anymore ..in addition, to think that a scammer only uses one method, ie. check to scam is not logical.....to just not send checks in the future as one member recommends could now open you up to other scams from the same unidentified person.....I don't think scammers have a professional conduct code that they will limit their scams in one specific way and will never use any other method...thus to say just not to buy through a check to me doesn't seem a like a solution to avoid this potential scammer...

plus I have paid by check before to get better deals, now if no checks are ever accepted, prices will be higher...

[bnorth]

Chances are the OP will never know what happened. The OP will either get their money back or they won't.
I had something very similar happen to me about 4 yrs ago. I was lucky and got my $4000 back but neither the bank or police would tell me what actually happened.

[brob28]

Thanks for the tip. I never thought of that. Instead of writing it though, I may have a stamp printed and just stamp all my checks in the future.

I wonder if you could get the check company to print that on there?

David, I know this can be done, I have seen it before on checks cut for business purposes, although, I've not seen it on personal checks before so not certain on that part.

[Runscott]

.....to just not send checks in the future as one member recommends could now open you up to other scams from the same unidentified person.....I don't think scammers have a professional conduct code that they will limit their scams in one specific way and will never use any other method...thus to say just not to buy through a check to me doesn't seem a like a solution to avoid this potential scammer...

plus I have paid by check before to get better deals, now if no checks are ever accepted, prices will be higher...

I was being a smart-ass. Get some sleep and quit worrying about this.

[obcmac]

I am in the group that is annoyed that Ian isn't naming names. While drawing on the resources of the board to help himself, he is offering nothing to the board members to help them protect themselves. If you want everyone's ideas and help, I think you owe us some helpful information back. If anyone can name one example where a phrase like "the person I've had a difficult time dealing with is x." has somehow impeded the progress of any case, I will withdraw my complaint.

Mac

[Leon]

I am in the group that is annoyed that Ian isn't naming names. While drawing on the resources of the board to help himself, he is offering nothing to the board members to help them protect themselves. If you want everyone's ideas and help, I think you owe us some helpful information back. If anyone can name one example where a phrase like "the person I've had a difficult time dealing with is x." has somehow impeded the progress of any case, I will withdraw my complaint.

Mac

I think everyone will get more information in due time. This isn't a race. And also, the fact this is a potential 14 month old fraud, I am not convinced this person does lots of it. As said, he has been on the board a long time (6+ yrs if not more) and I don't remember any other issues with him. I am with Ian on this one....

[1952boyntoncollector]

[QUOTE=Leon;1380164]I think everyone will get more information in due time. This isn't a race. And also, the fact this is a potential 14 month old fraud, I am not convinced this person does lots of it. As said, he has been on the board a long time (6+ yrs if not more) and I don't remember any other issues with him. I am with Ian on this one....[/Q

I don't care if a guy doesn't do lots of fraud.... a little bit of fraud to the victim or next victim would be bad enough...again you do say 'in due time'...I agree can wait but if we never here a peep from the seller and months pass I think the net54 community will want to know who it is ...as it appears from even from the posts that state that the name wont be mentioned now still agree that the name should be stated eventually..if issue never resolved...to protect the interests of new buyers.

..so we will see

[Runscott]

...I agree can wait but if we never here a peep from the seller and months pass I think the net54 community will want to know who it is ...as it appears from even from the posts that state that the name wont be mentioned now still agree that the name should be stated eventually..if issue never resolved...to protect the interests of new buyers.

..so we will see

RED - these things have not yet happened, so quit worrying that they will
BLUE - good, then do this

[itjclarke]

If anyone can name one example where a phrase like "the person I've had a difficult time dealing with is x." has somehow impeded the progress of any case, I will withdraw my complaint.

For this reason, I fully intend to name him if he doesn't come forward and cooperate with me, my bank, the investigation. You have to realize that I had hoped to accomplish something with this thread, other than creating a witch hunt. However unlikely it was, I wanted to ratchet things up a notch with him so that perhaps he'd contact me. I'd say I was 99% sure he wouldn't come forward when I originally posted, and am probably 99.9% sure now.

Even if he does reach out to me, the perfect chain of events would need to take place for me to not inform the board who he is. At this point, I think I've covered most of my bases, and don't think it will affect the investigation's progress to out him here. That said, I do think he may get a flurry of PMs once he's identified, and do worry about possible meddling there. Not saying I think this will happen, but this is my first go around with something like this, so I'm learning as I go. I am trying to be cautious and consider all possibilities.

I'm all for protecting/warning the board, however as Leon said, he (assuming he is indeed involved) has not been ripping people off left and right. He's been a member almost 6 years and has sold dozens and dozens of items. I also have doubts he (again assuming he did this) would do similar on another board... my gut tells me he's trying to live a very straight, clean, legal life right now, and staying under the radar. So to that point, I think and hope that my waiting a few days here for him to contact me isn't going to cost anyone else.

[itjclarke]

Well, I said to myself before starting this thread, I'd give this guy through the weekend to reach out to me before I'd name him here. It doesn't look like that's happening anytime soon, so here we are.

I should say, regardless of the circumstances and my own suspicions, I don't know for certain this guy stole my money, or helped to steal my money (I hope to know soon). What is indisputable though is that this guy has been totally non communicative for over 3 weeks now, leaving critical questions from me and my bank unanswered, and as of late last week had still not simply signed a one page bank form that's been sent to him twice. This is after his being minimally communicative and vague at the beginning of this process, and after he for some reason edited his original sale thread several months after our deal. It now reads that PayPal gift is an accepted form of payment:confused:. That thread is now locked.

Until December, I had no reason to think my transaction had been anything but a good one, and had since exchanged pleasant emails with this guy over a handful of other cards. I'm guessing several others here have probably done transactions with him, presumably all good ones since I'd never seen anything negative posted about him. I'd also guess several here may know him since he's been here since 2009 and since we've got a lot of Philly area and PA guys on this board. No matter what happens now though, or what he or his friends may eventually say in his defense, he's shown his true colors to me.

Going forward, I probably won't offer up any new details as this progresses, however I will post the outcome, and more importantly any further lessons learned that may help you guys down the road. Thank you to those who've chimed in with ideas, offers of advice and/or help, and general support. This board is the best... at least the vast majority of it.

BTW, to the point of lessons learned, I saw Ed's earlier comment about putting a void after 180 days. Thanks for the comment and it seems like a very good idea, however from all I've read, once again the bank is not responsible for honoring these types of notes on your checks. Not really sure what the banks are responsible for? That said, I probably will start putting that note on any checks, and will just hope there is a responsible teller and/or bank on the other end of it.

[the 'stache]

Ian, Leon et all,

I just did some quick checking on the other forums I am a member of, looking to see if this individual is a member elsewhere, and if so, are they active as a member, and are they are involved in any recent buy/sell transactions.

I used the forum advanced search function, looking for any posts by user name "TimeLord", and name "Richard Cavalieri". I also cross referenced all the forum names with Google, searching the user name, and his actual name as well.

I found nothing on Collector's Universe, Freedom Cardboard, or Sportscardforum.

However, I did find an active member with the user name TimeLord on the Blowout Cards forum that is actively trading, buying and selling.

Now, Ian lists the TimeLord in question on Net 54 as living in Philly. The member on Blowout lists their place of residence as Tennessee. However, their signature shows they are collecting football cards...Eagles football cards. Their Photobucket user name, which I have listed in the next post, also shows a connection to Philadelphia. I've taken a screenshot of their most recent activity, their sign up date, and their current signature. However, while I retain that image, I have taken it down, as I do not with to involve the TimeLord on Blowout if they are not this same person. Until a definitive connection is made one way or another, I do not want to besmirch their reputation on what may be merely coincidence.

BTW, I checked Sports Card Forum's Bad Trader List for the user name and actual name Ian listed, and I did not see him listed there. I know that multiple card sites pool their information (Blowout, I do believe, being one of them).

[the 'stache]

The user name listed on his Photobucket account is thephilidelphiaphenom.

ebay user ID: thephilidelphiaphenom

I don't see any vintage or pre-war baseball cards listed.

[Jacklitsch]

The Blowout Cards TimeLord is not our Timelord.

Our Timelord, Richard, is in Philadelphia, and is, I believe, in the banking business and collects vintage. His collecting interests include e107 and meteorites. He has websites devoted to both.

[CobbvLajoie1910]

Bill, why not privately send your screengrabs to Ian?

I'm sure the other Timelord loves that he’s being publically linked to a potential theft (and his collecting budget questioned).

[batsballsbases]

Bill, why not privately send your screengrabs to Ian?

I'm sure the other Timelord loves that he’s being publically linked to a potential theft (and his collecting budget questioned).

+1

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't know Richard personally but have done a few deals with him on 4 digit-type cards with no issues. I guess one never knows, but I would be surprised if he is involved in any wrongdoing. I hope it works out for you.

[7nohitter]

This guy is IN the banking business?????

[1952boyntoncollector]

I don't know Richard personally but have done a few deals with him on 4 digit-type cards with no issues. I guess one never knows, but I would be surprised if he is involved in any wrongdoing. I hope it works out for you.


At this point..if we do not hear any response from Richard, I actually believe its because hes not around, in poor health, out of the hobby, or on vacation.....nothing to do about him being wrong...

I find it hard to believe he knows about this discussion and wouldn't respond.......basically I sincerely doubt he sees this discussion and did something wrong and thus hes not responding..

if hes around...whether he was wrong or right we will hear from him for sure.......my three cents..

[Luke]

At this point..if we do not hear any response from Richard, I actually believe its because hes not around, in poor health, out of the hobby, or on vacation.....nothing to do about him being wrong...

I find it hard to believe he knows about this discussion and wouldn't respond.......basically I sincerely doubt he sees this discussion and did something wrong and thus hes not responding..

if hes around...whether he was wrong or right we will hear from him for sure.......my three cents..


There's no way you could come to this conclusion if you had read all of Ian's posts. At least read all the information before throwing an opinion out there.

[the 'stache]

The Blowout Cards TimeLord is not our Timelord.

Our Timelord, Richard, is in Philadelphia, and is, I believe, in the banking business and collects vintage. His collecting interests include e107 and meteorites. He has websites devoted to both.

Steve, yes, the Richard in question here is in Philladelphia, and the TimeLord on Blowout is listed in Tennessee. This is true. But the TimeLord on Blowout collects Eagles football cards, and their Photobucket user name also references an affiliation with Philadelphia. Now, maybe it is two different people, and that's why I am going to edit my posts from last night. But it would be a heck of a coincidence if two people posting on popular sports card forums with the same user name, both having an association with Philadelphia, turned out to be different people. When I Google the phrase "Time Lord", or "TimeLord", I see no association with the city whatsoever. If that were the case, it would make the user name and Philly connection more of a coincidence. What I do see, instead, is a connection to Doctor Who. So, do we now have two different people who are both sports card collectors, with a connection to Philadelphia, AND Doctor Who fans?

As far as pointing out that this board's TimeLord collects vintage baseball, while the one on Blowout pursues modern football cards as evidence that they are different people, well, that's really a non sequitur leap. When I came back to the hobby, I first joined Sports Card Forum, collecting modern cards with sticker/on card autos, and pieces of game used memorabilia, much like the ones the collector on Blowout deals in. I then discovered I loved vintage and pre-war baseball cards when I signed up here. It is quite possible to collect both the new and the old equally, and pursue cards for both collections with equal zeal. Perhaps the guy on Blowout sells non Eagles cards to fund his pre-war and vintage baseball cards here? It's possible, and I feel confident in saying that it is not rare to collect both modern and very old cards.

I'm not trying to say that you're right or wrong, only that you can't really make that kind of assumption. We know the person in question on Net 54 has been very evasive in communication with both Ian and Leon, and has not responded to correspondence sent directly to him by the bank. Based on the recent behavior by our forum's Time Lord, it is not hard to believe that they could be purposely avoiding mention of their membership here on Blowout so they don't get wind of what he's been doing here.

I held out hope that there was a simple explaination for the cashing of Ian's check, and in a way, I still do. I will hold no ill will for TimeLord on our forum, so long as he remedies the situation immediately, gives Ian back his money, and provides an explanation for what happened. But the longer this goes on, the more I become convinced that is not going to happen, and thusly, my involvement switches from that of a mere spectator to somebody actively trying to help resolve this situation. I consider Ian a friend, and I count myself as one of many on the forum who consider him to be both fair and honest. Plus, I don't like seeing anybody taken advantage of, and I hate thieves more than almost anybody. My training in detecting fraud, and theft, set off immediate red flags the first time I read what was going on, and thus far, I've not seen anything at all that would lead me to question my suspicions.


Bill, why not privately send your screengrabs to Ian?

I'm sure the other Timelord loves that he’s being publically linked to a potential theft (and his collecting budget questioned).

Aaron, you're right. I'll edit out my posts, because there does exist the possibility that this is not the same person, and I wouldn't want to needlessly associate the other person with the shenanigans going on here if that is indeed the case. I'm frustrated for Ian, but I don't want to draw somebody into this if they have no involvement at all.

Should the TimeLord on Blowout see this, and they are not at all involved, please accept my apology. While I will retain the images if they are needed, I won't display them publicly.

[pencil1974]

Well something is wrong if he's not willing to work with Ian and the bank to make it right.

I would think he would be trying his best to remedy the situation so that another person is not out a large sum of money and would be trying to help in any way possible which does not appear to be the case.

[batsballsbases]

At this point..if we do not hear any response from Richard, I actually believe its because hes not around, in poor health, out of the hobby, or on vacation.....nothing to do about him being wrong...

I find it hard to believe he knows about this discussion and wouldn't respond.......basically I sincerely doubt he sees this discussion and did something wrong and thus hes not responding..

if hes around...whether he was wrong or right we will hear from him for sure.......my three cents..

Curious And your basing your opinion upon?_______ You fill in the blank.

[Econteachert205]

I think timelord is a pretty common dr. Who reference so it's perfectly possible for it to be a common user name.

[Leon]

Well something is wrong if he's not willing to work with Ian and the bank to make it right.

I would think he would be trying his best to remedy the situation so that another person is not out a large sum of money and would be trying to help in any way possible which does not appear to be the case.

+1 To me, this is it.

[batsballsbases]

Ian,
just a thought if you now Google his name that you posted (Without changing the letters in some way) His profile comes up but also this post with all that is going on, on Net 54 Before there is and outcome I.E. Legal you might want to re think that in some way..

[the 'stache]

I think timelord is a pretty common dr. Who reference so it's perfectly possible for it to be a common user name.

Yes, and that's why I've edited my posts. It may be mere coincidence. Absolutely I agree with that assertion. But the more things that two posters on different forums share in common, the less likely they are different people.

So far, we have established three things in common: the user name likely references they are a fan of Doctor Who. We know both users like sports cards (though as of yet, from different eras). That alone would be a weak connection.

But when you add a third element, the Philadelphia connection, now you start questioning if the user name is a coincidence, or they are the same person. There are a lot of cities in America, and for two people to live in, or have an affinity for the city of Philadelphia, collect sports cards, and be Doctor Who fans...at that point, you have a slightly stronger argument. I would still like to connect a few more dots, obviously, but it's enough to at least warrant digging deeper.

[1952boyntoncollector]

There's no way you could come to this conclusion if you had read all of Ian's posts. At least read all the information before throwing an opinion out there.


I did read...many people have said that the seller has been legit...no other problems identified by any other member....one isolated incident..........I am just making an opinion......people to go into bad health or life happens..its not always intentional fraud......I don't know what happened for sure..i just giving an opinion of another option....his name has only been posted for less than a day.....maybe we will hear from him....

[Gobucsmagic74]

I did read...many people have said that the seller has been legit...no other problems identified by any other member....one isolated incident..........I am just making an opinion......people to go into bad health or life happens..its not always intentional fraud......I don't know what happened for sure..i just giving an opinion of another option....his name has only been posted for less than a day.....maybe we will hear from him....

Periods man, periods.

[frankbmd]

I did read...many people have said that the seller has been legit...no other problems identified by any other member....one isolated incident..........I am just making an opinion......people to go into bad health or life happens..its not always intentional fraud......I don't know what happened for sure..i just giving an opinion of another option....his name has only been posted for less than a day.....maybe we will hear from him....

I see about 50 periods.;)

[Luke]

I did read...many people have said that the seller has been legit...no other problems identified by any other member....one isolated incident..........I am just making an opinion......people to go into bad health or life happens..its not always intentional fraud......I don't know what happened for sure..i just giving an opinion of another option....his name has only been posted for less than a day.....maybe we will hear from him....

So you read that Ian needed timelord to fill out a bank form. And that timelord told Ian that he wasn't going to comply with the request. And then quit responding to him at all. And you think its more likely that timelord got sick than is just ignoring Ian? Doesn't seem like a very logical thought process. Which is why I assumed you didn't read all of the information.

[the 'stache]

So you read that Ian needed timelord to fill out a bank form. And that timelord told Ian that he wasn't going to comply with the request. And then quit responding to him at all. And you think its more likely that timelord got sick than is just ignoring Ian? Doesn't seem like a very logical thought process. Which is why I assumed you didn't read all of the information.

Thank you, Luke.

This, from one of Ian's earlier posts, for me, anyway, completely eliminates the possibility that this is just a case of TimeLord "getting sick" and ducking out for a while.

I sent him an affidavit for check fraud that he needed to sign and mail in. I sent the form with a pre-addressed and stamped evenlope so it would be easy, but he told me his lawyer and a Wells banker had told him this form should never have been sent to him, and that the bank took it from him and "destroyed" it! WTF?!?!? My bank's fraud investigator said a branch teller should have never said or done anything like this and asked me to get the branch's location from him. He did not respond to that question, nor has he responded since. This was 3 weeks ago. My bank has since sent him the same form directly, but as far as I can tell he's ignoring the process.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Thank you, Luke.

This, from one of Ian's earlier posts, for me, anyway, completely eliminates the possibility that this is just a case of TimeLord "getting sick" and ducking out for a while.

good points...never shown the emails ..but taken to be true I agree it looks really really bad for him. I have just seen it happen before that after someone owed money or didn't do what was promised getting scolded and it turned out that person died so the person doing the scolding felt pretty bad so nothing is ever 100%.....

[D.P.Johnson]

good points...never shown the emails ..but taken to be true I agree it looks really really bad for him. I have just seen it happen before that after someone owed money or didn't do what was promised getting scolded and it turned out that person died so the person doing the scolding felt pretty bad so nothing is ever 100%.....

Yeah, I'll give him a pass on this one if he's dead...

[slidekellyslide]

There would have been absolutely no reason for timelord to have edited the original BST ad if he had nothing to do with cashing that check. He edited it on 2/2/15 to add "Paypal gift accepted" a full 16 months after making the original posting. He has quite clearly incriminated himself with that edit. Perhaps the timelord didn't realize his edit would leave a time stamp?

[D.P.Johnson]

There would have been absolutely no reason for timelord to have edited the original BST ad if he had nothing to do with cashing that check. He edited it on 2/2/15 to add "Paypal gift accepted" a full 16 months after making the original posting. He has quite clearly incriminated himself with that edit. Perhaps the timelord didn't realize his edit would leave a time stamp?

There's a perfectly reasonable answer as to why he did this which Mr. Boynton will share with you shortly...

[7nohitter]

There would have been absolutely no reason for timelord to have edited the original BST ad if he had nothing to do with cashing that check. He edited it on 2/2/15 to add "Paypal gift accepted" a full 16 months after making the original posting. He has quite clearly incriminated himself with that edit. Perhaps the timelord didn't realize his edit would leave a time stamp?

Are you talking about the Mayo Robinson? I see that was edited 2-2-14

[btcarfagno]

There's a perfectly reasonable answer as to why he did this which Mr. Boynton will share with you shortly...

Because he's dead.

Wait...

Tom C

[Leon]

Are you talking about the Mayo Robinson? I see that was edited 2-2-14

Yes, the thread I locked right after he did it.

[1952boyntoncollector]

There would have been absolutely no reason for timelord to have edited the original BST ad if he had nothing to do with cashing that check. He edited it on 2/2/15 to add "Paypal gift accepted" a full 16 months after making the original posting. He has quite clearly incriminated himself with that edit. Perhaps the timelord didn't realize his edit would leave a time stamp?


Whats the use of a time stamp when the guy is a freak'n timelord...

[ibuysportsephemera]

There would have been absolutely no reason for timelord to have edited the original BST ad if he had nothing to do with cashing that check. He edited it on 2/2/15 to add "Paypal gift accepted" a full 16 months after making the original posting. He has quite clearly incriminated himself with that edit. Perhaps the timelord didn't realize his edit would leave a time stamp?

+1...Definitely incriminating.

Jeff

[itjclarke]

Yes, the thread I locked right after he did it.

It's actually the N300 Delahanty which sold around the same time as the Robinson. Thanks for locking down the thread Leon.

Bill, and others, thanks for doing some legwork. I'd done a bit of my own but am not going to publicly post any of that here (yet). Going forward feel free to email anything you find you think may help, but that may be too sensitive to post here, directly to itjclarke@yahoo.com.

Al, I will see if I can jumble letters a bit.

[Leon]

It's actually the N300 Delahanty which sold around the same time as the Robinson. Thanks for locking down the thread Leon.

Bill, and others, thanks for doing some legwork. I'd done a bit of my own but am not going to publicly post any of that here (yet). Going forward feel free to email anything you find you think may help, but that may be too sensitive to post here, directly to itjclarke@yahoo.com.

Al, I will see if I can jumble letters a bit.

I got my mayo's confused. I like mustard anyway >:).....

[brob28]

My pleasure Ian. It is our responsibility and in our best interests to help each other police our hobby. Thank you for letting us know about this.

[vintagetoppsguy]

The Blowout Cards TimeLord is not our Timelord.

Our Timelord, Richard, is in Philadelphia, and is, I believe, in the banking business and collects vintage. His collecting interests include e107 and meteorites. He has websites devoted to both.

If he's in the banking business, I think that speaks volumes.

[Bocabirdman]

If he's in the banking business, I think that speaks volumes.

Jesse James was in the Banking Business too.!

[1952boyntoncollector]

Jesse James was in the Banking Business too.!

along with lots of guys on the show American greed

[nolemmings]

There would have been absolutely no reason for timelord to have edited the original BST ad if he had nothing to do with cashing that check. He edited it on 2/2/15 to add "Paypal gift accepted" a full 16 months after making the original posting. He has quite clearly incriminated himself with that edit. Perhaps the timelord didn't realize his edit would leave a time stamp?

OK I'm lost. Where is there a 2-2-15 edit? I only see a 2-2-14 edit.

[Econteachert205]

OK I'm lost. Where is there a 2-2-15 edit? I only see a 2-2-14 edit.

I also only saw the 2-2-14 edit on both cards mentioned

[Leon]

I also only saw the 2-2-14 edit on both cards mentioned

That is still 6 months after the initial post(s). Very strange at best...

[Econteachert205]

That is still 6 months after the initial post(s). Very strange at best...
Agree, especially the kind of edit made.

[nolemmings]

Not really, and it's only 2+ months from when he said he didn't receive the check and instead received paypal-- the OP said the paypal and card were both received in November '13. I've been guilty of forgetting to update the B/S/T thread for awhile after I've sold a card. I guess I fail to see the incriminating nature of the edit at all.

[slidekellyslide]

My bad...I still think it's 2014 for some reason...anyway he edited that post well after the transaction was completed to say "Paypal gift accepted"...why would do this? And who does this?

[packs]

People might have asked if he accepted Paypal before the buyer actually sent payment. I never consider a transaction as being complete before being paid, but I will put the card/item on hold and always take first satisfying offer.

[batsballsbases]

My bad...I still think it's 2014 for some reason...anyway he edited that post well after the transaction was completed to say "Paypal gift accepted"...why would do this? And who does this?

To tell the truth I do it alot Dan. I go back sometimes 4,5,6 months erase most of the text and pictures. I do it most of the time just so I dont get PMs asking if these items are still for sale.etc. Most of the time I erase everything and put SOLD in the listing. I dont know its just something I do so I dont see it to be that strange. But to change to paypal gift accepted only maybe a bit out of line.

[nolemmings]

My bad...I still think it's 2014 for some reason...anyway he edited that post well after the transaction was completed to say "Paypal gift accepted"...why would do this? And who does this?

Do you have a list of all his prior edits, if any? Most people here, although I'm not entirely certain why, feel the need to remove the price once the item is sold, and this clearly was done here. Other than that, do we know whether the manner of payment that seller found satisfactory was edited in after the fact, i.e., do we know the exact portion of the message that had been edited?

Finally, even if that language was added with the price removal, could that not just be an internal note for seller’s accounting purposes as to how he got paid?

[bnorth]

To tell the truth I do it alot Dan. I go back sometimes 4,5,6 months erase most of the text and pictures. I do it most of the time just so I dont get PMs asking if these items are still for sale.etc. Most of the time I erase everything and put SOLD in the listing. I dont know its just something I do so I dont see it to be that strange. But to change to paypal gift accepted only maybe a bit out of line.

Sorry to be a little off topic. I can understand adding SOLD to the listing but not deleting entire posts, changing pictures after item has sold, or removing the price after item has sold. I know several sellers do this just don't understand why.

[itjclarke]

To tell the truth I do it alot Dan. I go back sometimes 4,5,6 months erase most of the text and pictures. I do it most of the time just so I dont get PMs asking if these items are still for sale.etc. Most of the time I erase everything and put SOLD in the listing. I dont know its just something I do so I dont see it to be that strange. But to change to paypal gift accepted only maybe a bit out of line.

All, I'll say I find this one of the least compelling bits of information presented so far (as well as other things learned off line). I didn't refer to this in my original post because it was well down the pecking order, but had PMd with Leon separately about it since I thought it odd. Eliminate this completely from the discussion and there's still a lot of other "stuff".

I'll leave it at that, and won't make any more assertions here. I personally hope this thread sort of dies down, as I think it's mostly served its purpose for now. Thanks for all good ideas and opinions received thus far, and I continue to welcome any ideas/suggestions others may have, however ask you use my email- itjclarke@yahoo.com since my PM box is just about full.

As said before, after all is said and done, I'll bullet the outcome and any key lessons learned about this or similar situations.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Sorry to be a little off topic. I can understand adding SOLD to the listing but not deleting entire posts, changing pictures after item has sold, or removing the price after item has sold. I know several sellers do this just don't understand why.

I think sellers remove the price because after its sold serves both the buyer and seller.

for the buyer..if I was going to sell it again ..it may never get more than what i paid for it on net 54 if trying to sell on net54..some buyers just refuse to pay more more than what they see a card sold for on the same site....for the seller...if the card sells at auctions for less money, it wont look good for potential sales pitch on other cards if people can see that you have tried to sell cards in the past for more than they sell for on ebay...

[Leon]

Do you have a list of all his prior edits, if any? Most people here, although I'm not entirely certain why, feel the need to remove the price once the item is sold, and this clearly was done here. Other than that, do we know whether the manner of payment that seller found satisfactory was edited in after the fact, i.e., do we know the exact portion of the message that had been edited?

Finally, even if that language was added with the price removal, could that not just be an internal note for seller’s accounting purposes as to how he got paid?

Dude, forget all of that crap. He knows someone cashed a check written to him, said it wasn't him, and won't help.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Dude, forget all of that crap. He knows someone cashed a check written to him, said it wasn't him, and won't help.

And Todd had 14 follow-up questions too....

[pencil1974]

Dude, forget all of that crap. He knows someone cashed a check written to him, said it wasn't him, and won't help.

Exactly! Like I said before, its just simple common sense that if you had nothing to do with what happened you would be helping this person out as much as possible to help make it right.

[nolemmings]

Dude, forget all of that crap. He knows someone cashed a check written to him, said it wasn't him, and won't help.

Wow, why the hostility? I just questioned what was supposed to be some sort of smoking gun that turns out not to be so. Forgive me for having doused my torch and blunted my pitchfork.

And you can bet, Peter, that I would have far more than 14 questions :) Oh well, back to the lynching at hand.

[Leon]

Wow, why the hostility? I just questioned what was supposed to be some sort of smoking gun that turns out not to be so. Forgive me for having doused my torch and blunted my pitchfork.

And you can bet, Peter, that I would have far more than 14 questions :) Oh well, back to the lynching at hand.

It wasn't supposed to come out hostile, sorry about that. But I think sometimes we get sidetracked from some of the most important issues.

[nolemmings]

It wasn't supposed to come out hostile, sorry about that. But I think sometimes we get sidetracked from some of the most important issues.

Agreed. Like not pre-judging or jumping to conclusions, and acknowledging that everyone should be entitled to a defense, even in absentia. I am confident the truth will be made known to the appropriate parties in time, and see little gained by fanning the flames now.

[glchen]

Agreed. Like not pre-judging or jumping to conclusions, and acknowledging that everyone should be entitled to a defense, even in absentia. I am confident the truth will be made known to the appropriate parties in time, and see little gained by fanning the flames now.

The guy's not helping. That should be fairly incriminating. I would think that the bank should be able to show which account that check was deposited into, and then if that account belongs to Timelord, then I don't know how Timelord can explain it. If the check went into some other account unrelated to Timelord or to cash, then there is something more of a possibility the check was stolen and the signature forged.

[itjclarke]

Well, I said I wouldn't give a play by play going forward, but there has just been a positive development. My bank's fraud claims people called this afternoon and said they had just received the completed and signed affidavit for check fraud form. I do not have any more details, nor will I share more about their investigation until it's done, but I felt it fair to Richard and the board to let you all know.

I still have not heard a word from Richard in 3.5 weeks, but I'll take this as a positive 1st step.. though I expect there will need to be several more steps ahead.

[slipk1068]

Awesome :)

[1952boyntoncollector]

[QUOTE=itjclarke;1381670]Well, I said I wouldn't give a play by play going forward, but there has just been a positive development. My bank's fraud claims people called this afternoon and said they had just received the completed and signed affidavit for check fraud form. I do not have any more details, nor will I share more about their investigation until it's done, but I felt it fair to Richard and the board to let you all know.

I still have not heard a word from Richard in 3.5 weeks, but I'll take this as a positive 1st step.. though I expect there will need to be several more steps ahead.[/QUOTE

a good start.....

[chaddurbin]

lesson learned... don't deal with anyone that has more than one "final price reduction".

[itjclarke]

I guess it's an appropriate time to bump this thread, due in part to some recent BST postings that I'd noticed (and had pointed out to me by a few board members), as well as the fact I'm now closer to full resolution.

About 4-5 weeks ago, the full amount of money I'd lost simply re-appeared in my account. It reappeared as quickly and inexplicably as it had disappeared, and I didn't notice until a few days later. I then received a brief form letter from Wells Fargo simply stating money had been deposited, making reference to a case number, but offering no specific case details. I have a call into them, have not heard back, and have been otherwise pretty swamped work/life wise so haven't pursued it further. I presume they found enough to determine there was fraud/foul play involved and were able to get the depositing bank to pay them. That part is good, but the lingering questions still bug me.

I still have yet to hear a peep from the BST seller (Timelord) since well prior to this thread's origin. I guess now, as he is selling again, is another opportunity for him to speak up here, or reach out to me directly. Regardless, once things slow down a bit for me (prob in Fall), and I get caught up elsewhere, I'll continue pursuing the bank's "investigators" for more information. If/when I get any info that seems relevant to board dealings, I'll post it here.

Thanks again to all the guys who offered advice and feedback when I was working through this. This board is awesome. If anyone wants to connect this go around, feel free to email directly-- itjclarke@yahoo.com since my PM box is pretty full.

[shammus]

Hopefully you hear back from the bank but I'm glad you got a refund so you're at least not out any money at this point. Best of luck to you, Ian!