Incredible eBay find that never materialized (newly discovered info on 6/26!!!)

[bigfanNY]

Well first off he never promised to sell you the card for $1200.00. Second he told you he took card in on trade.Third he is right not giving you name of collector who traded it. IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. What make you think anyone owes it to you to prove their innocence. I thought basic justice meant Everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
You know who did you wrong do the work to fix it or get over it. Trashing someone who you feel is withholding evidence from you is wrong. JUST WRONG. Put yourself in Joe's shoes would you act differantly? I would not,who I trade or sell cards to and for how much is none of yours or anybody's business. Unless card has been reported stolen and this card has not.

[sterlingfox]

So all the evidence so far points to Joe as the buyer of the card, and I should just blindly trust his word that he's innocent?

The original seller is NOT the only person who wronged me here.

If Joe's story has any merit at all, he needs to provide info on who traded him the card. IT IS MY BUSINESS if he's the only person who can provide that info.

If I were in Joe's shoes, not only would I do everything I could to help out, including providing info on the client, I'd also never do business again with that client. Joe obviously values his client over his ethics. And that's going on a HUGE assumption that his story is even true.

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Well first off he never promised to sell you the card for $1200.00. Second he told you he took card in on trade.Third he is right not giving you name of collector who traded it. IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. What make you think anyone owes it to you to prove their innocence. I thought basic justice meant Everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
You know who did you wrong do the work to fix it or get over it. Trashing someone who you feel is withholding evidence from you is wrong. JUST WRONG. Put yourself in Joe's shoes would you act differantly? I would not,who I trade or sell cards to and for how much is none of yours or anybody's business. Unless card has been reported stolen and this card has not.

[BLongley]

Wait a second....have you read the post? The OP bought the card, paid for it, and then received shipping confirmation. Then about 15 minutes later received an email from the seller maxcollector69 thaT THE CARD AND CASE WAS DAMAGED BY HIS KIDS AND HE WAS CANCELING THE DEAL.... now here we are a few weeks later and suddenly our seller Joe, has THE EXACT CARD IN THE EXACT CASE WITH ZERO DAMAGE for sale on eBay.... he doesn't have to say how he acquired it but it's maxcollector69s card in the same case, ... I sent him a question asking him about the claimed damage to the card and case from the original seller and he did not respond at all.... all of his actions seem to be ones of someone with a guilty conscience (I would bet anyone that Joe told maxcollector69 he sold too cheap and he would pay him more, then did so off eBay, but was so stupid he listed it on eBay for all of us to see).... you say he's a good guy, so go ahead buy from him.... but I will never have interest in anything he sells.... he certainly can come on here and tell his side of the story, and I told him in my note to him about this Net54 post, but he is staying quiet...

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Well first off he never promised to sell you the card for $1200.00. Second he told you he took card in on trade.Third he is right not giving you name of collector who traded it. IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. What make you think anyone owes it to you to prove their innocence. I thought basic justice meant Everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
You know who did you wrong do the work to fix it or get over it. Trashing someone who you feel is withholding evidence from you is wrong. JUST WRONG. Put yourself in Joe's shoes would you act differantly? I would not,who I trade or sell cards to and for how much is none of yours or anybody's business. Unless card has been reported stolen and this card has not.

[jfkheat]

I wouldn't tell anyone where I got the card from either for privacy reasons. Last year I sold a card to a member here. When he received the package the bubble mailer had been sliced open and the card was gone. A couple months ago the card showed as part of a set up at an auction house that lists their auctions here. I called the auction house asking for the same type of information that you are asking for. I was told that for privacy reasons they couldn't give me any info.
James

[Republicaninmass]

You can bet if any of my stolen cards show up, I'll try my damndest to find where they came from. Not that I'll have any luck

[timn1]

Sure, Maybe Joe is totally innocent, and piglets could also fly out of my behind. He didn’t even bother to sell it in a different venue. Pretty shameless if you ask me.

Originally Posted by BLongley

Wait a second....have you read the post? The OP bought the card, paid for it, and then received shipping confirmation. Then about 15 minutes later received an email from the seller maxcollector69 thaT THE CARD AND CASE WAS DAMAGED BY HIS KIDS AND HE WAS CANCELING THE DEAL.... now here we are a few weeks later and suddenly our seller Joe, has THE EXACT CARD IN THE EXACT CASE WITH ZERO DAMAGE for sale on eBay.... he doesn't have to say how he acquired it but it's maxcollector69s card in the same case, ... I sent him a question asking him about the claimed damage to the card and case from the original seller and he did not respond at all.... all of his actions seem to be ones of someone with a guilty conscience (I would bet anyone that Joe told maxcollector69 he sold too cheap and he would pay him more, then did so off eBay, but was so stupid he listed it on eBay for all of us to see).... you say he's a good guy, so go ahead buy from him.... but I will never have interest in anything he sells.... he certainly can come on here and tell his side of the story, and I told him in my note to him about this Net54 post, but he is staying quiet...

[timn1]

Sure he did, that’s what posting something on eBay is, an implied promise to sell something for a certain price (either the BIN price or the auction hammer price).
In this case the seller set the price himself and then reneged on the promise. Pretty simple stuff, I would say. Hard to spin it away.

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Well first off he never promised to sell you the card for $1200.00..

[bigfanNY]

Brian You and the OP do not have have not a single shread of evidence that Joe bought the card from maxcollector69. Joe responded to the OP and answered his question on how he acquired the card. The card was not stolen so it would be wrong for him to tell you or anyone the name of who traded him the card. Again it is none of your business.
Don't you get that it is wrong to say things like I would bet anyone he is "guilty" and "stop by his booth at the national" without any proof that he did anything unethical. Who appointed you guys judge jury and executioner?
I personally would not contact an Ebay seller and offer him more for an item after it already sold. But in this case the only person who acted in a way that harmed the OP is MAXCOLLECTOR69. He made the decision to not ship the card and to lie about why. He made the decision to sell the card to someone else. Joe took the card in on trade NOTHING UNETHICAL OR ILLEGAL about that. If it was then I have been a criminal since I was 8 years old and started trading baseball cards.

As for Tim yes a promise is a promise and stupid is as stupid does. Next time please read the post and if you don't understand it ..then best not to respond to it.

I would suggest that you 3 owe an apology to Joe but I know self righteous guys like you rarely have the guts to admit you were wrong. And that a complete lack of evidence only makes the conspiracy more real. But standing up for the wrongly accused (Those accused despite any evidence to indicate they did anything wrong) is always the right thing to do. If Joe did anything at all wrong I think it will come out but you don't convict people and wait for the evidence to show up.
Jonathan Sterling

[timn1]

Yes, I did misread your post, although why you bothered to say that Joe did not promise to sell the OP the card for $1200 is a mystery since no one ever claimed he did. But The original eBay seller did make that promise, and there is good reason to suspect that Joe interfered with that transaction. If he didn’t, then he can come on this board and explain his side of things. That would go much further in his defense than your flailing about is doing.

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Brian You and the OP do not have have not a single shread of evidence that Joe bought the card from maxcollector69. Joe responded to the OP and answered his question on how he acquired the card. The card was not stolen so it would be wrong for him to tell you or anyone the name of who traded him the card. Again it is none of your business.
Don't you get that it is wrong to say things like I would bet anyone he is "guilty" and "stop by his booth at the national" without any proof that he did anything unethical. Who appointed you guys judge jury and executioner?
I personally would not contact an Ebay seller and offer him more for an item after it already sold. But in this case the only person who acted in a way that harmed the OP is MAXCOLLECTOR69. He made the decision to not ship the card and to lie about why. He made the decision to sell the card to someone else. Joe took the card in on trade NOTHING UNETHICAL OR ILLEGAL about that. If it was then I have been a criminal since I was 8 years old and started trading baseball cards.

As for Tim yes a promise is a promise and stupid is as stupid does. Next time please read the post and if you don't understand it ..then best not to respond to it.

I would suggest that you 3 owe an apology to Joe but I know self righteous guys like you rarely have the guts to admit you were wrong. And that a complete lack of evidence only makes the conspiracy more real. But standing up for the wrongly accused (Those accused despite any evidence to indicate they did anything wrong) is always the right thing to do. If Joe did anything at all wrong I think it will come out but you don't convict people and wait for the evidence to show up.
Jonathan Sterling

[sterlingfox]

So what you're saying is that Joe, or whoever the original buyer of the card is who offered more to maxcollector69, did nothing wrong? You even said yourself that's something you wouldn't do! Are you flipping serious!?!?

And Joe being the only other known owner of the card is plenty enough evidence to suspect him of being the buyer.

Where's the proof that Joe took the card in on trade? That's right. There's none!

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Brian You and the OP do not have have not a single shread of evidence that Joe bought the card from maxcollector69. Joe responded to the OP and answered his question on how he acquired the card. The card was not stolen so it would be wrong for him to tell you or anyone the name of who traded him the card. Again it is none of your business.
Don't you get that it is wrong to say things like I would bet anyone he is "guilty" and "stop by his booth at the national" without any proof that he did anything unethical. Who appointed you guys judge jury and executioner?
I personally would not contact an Ebay seller and offer him more for an item after it already sold. But in this case the only person who acted in a way that harmed the OP is MAXCOLLECTOR69. He made the decision to not ship the card and to lie about why. He made the decision to sell the card to someone else. Joe took the card in on trade NOTHING UNETHICAL OR ILLEGAL about that. If it was then I have been a criminal since I was 8 years old and started trading baseball cards.

As for Tim yes a promise is a promise and stupid is as stupid does. Next time please read the post and if you don't understand it ..then best not to respond to it.

I would suggest that you 3 owe an apology to Joe but I know self righteous guys like you rarely have the guts to admit you were wrong. And that a complete lack of evidence only makes the conspiracy more real. But standing up for the wrongly accused (Those accused despite any evidence to indicate they did anything wrong) is always the right thing to do. If Joe did anything at all wrong I think it will come out but you don't convict people and wait for the evidence to show up.
Jonathan Sterling

[rdixon1208]

Originally Posted by sterlingfox

So what you're saying is that Joe, or whoever the original buyer of the card is who offered more to maxcollector69, did nothing wrong? You even said yourself that's something you wouldn't do! Are you flipping serious!?!?

And Joe being the only other known owner of the card is plenty enough evidence to suspect him of being the buyer.

Where's the proof that Joe took the card in on trade? That's right. There's none!

This is where I think you're wrong. I understanding you suspecting him of being the buyer, but you're actually accusing him of it and demanding that he provide proof when you don't actually have any hard data to support your claim. That card could have changed hands multiple times between maxcollector69 and the guy who has it for sale now.

Robert Dixon

[BLongley]

Sure it could have, but joe doesn't seem to want to chime in, hence the suspection.... we have seen maxcollector69 have it, cancel the sale due to his kids destroying the card, and a few weeks later now have seen it reappear in joes inventory after he traded an expensive autograph for it...and according to Dmitry he wouldn't even say who it was an autograph of (not who the trade was with)... just who the auto was...

And what other hard data can he get? It is his business because he had a binding contract of purchase with maxcollector69 and was canceled with a lie. The fact that Joe can clearly see it was canceled with a lie, he may want to help Dmitry understand what he knows of the transaction, but has chosen not to, which causes many suspicions....

Originally Posted by rdixon1208

This is where I think you're wrong. I understanding you suspecting him of being the buyer, but you're actually accusing him of it and demanding that he provide proof when you don't actually have any hard data to support your claim. That card could have changed hands multiple times between maxcollector69 and the guy who has it for sale now.

Robert Dixon

[Marchillo]

I feel for the OP 100%. My great deals have been few and far between and thinking of not receiving one is devastating.

I think everyone agrees - the original seller with the false story is scum. I would never do business with them (if i actually remember them when coming across an item).

As for Joe - Not sure there is a right or wrong answer here but I think its dangerous to accuse someone as is being done here. I don't think Joe owes it to anyone to tell how he acquired the card, yet he told the OP that it was acquired by trade. I agree with Joe not giving up the name of the person he traded with. I honestly don't think he owes anyone anything at this point assuming this is the truth and the trade he mentions wasn't by him initiating a call on an item that already sold.

If Joe comes on here to defend himself and says "Like I told the OP, I acquired this card in a trade" - will that satisfy everyone?

What if Joe comes on here and says "Like I told the OP, I acquired this card in a trade, but will not reveal who I traded with" - will that satisfy everyone?

What if Joe comes on here and says "Like I told the OP, I acquired this card in a trade, I will not reveal who i traded with but I can tell you its not from the seller of the original listing" - will that satisfy everyone?

I have no relationship with Joe and for all I know Joe could have done some shenanigans in this whole ordeal. But assuming he didn't I still don't think he owes it to anyone to prove his innocence.

Again I feel for the OP - I don't think he's overreacting and if I were in his shoes i might say the same things even though I think they are dangerous things to say. Maybe some more information will come to light. It is probably in Joe's best interest to come on here but if he offers the same response he offered to the OP I am not sure where it will get him.

[joed25]

This is Andrew Dwek. Joe Dwek is my brother and partner. Joe and I buy, sell and trade sports memorabilia and autographs.The accusation that we stole this card from Dmitry by offering the ebay seller more is simply false. We traded for the card having no knowledge of any sales or transactions on it. A client was interested in a high end item of our’s and asked if we would consider trading it to him for multiple items. After going back and forth on potential trade pieces over a few days we agreed on a package of multiple items coming our way in exchange for the one high end item in our store. One of the items we received was this card.

We rarely deal in vintage cards unless they're autographed. In all of our years of doing this, we have never once bought a vintage graded card unless it was included in a package that consisted mainly of autographs and memorabilia. We don't follow card auctions and sales and never have bid on card auctions or listings of any kind. We certainly would never make an offer to a seller after an ebay sale had completed. We wouldn't do so even if the item was right is in our wheelhouse and we’d be able to make a quick profit on it. We certainly wouldn't do it on a vintage card for which we have no real feel for and have no clients/buyers for. While we've been the victim of such practices countless times we would never engage in such business practices. We love what we do, feel blessed to be able to dedicate so much time to the hobby and believe there's enough good and legitimate business out there.

To prove I'm saying the truth I'm willing to show our conversations and communications with this trade client to a net54 board member. I would do so in person, either now in New Jersey or at the national. I will show the proof of the trade to a neutral person, not someone who was affected by the cancelled ebay sale or feels they incurred a loss. The client’s identity will remain anonymous.

After we listed the card for sale in our ebay store, Dmitry messaged us about the cancelled ebay sale. We immediately offered to talk to him on the phone to explain what had happened. Attached are the ebay messages:

[BLongley]

Without a doubt maxcollector69 is guilty for not following through on his transaction, and the reason he didn't we clearly know is a lie because the case isn't damaged. Now here we are and showpiecessports has the card in his inventory for sale.

Nothing unethical or illegal about trading for it, or unethical or illegal if he bought it, and nothing illegal if he interfered with Dmitrys transaction (although eBay would be less than thrilled for loosing transaction fees and having shenanigans taking place through their company's business, but we know it happens all the time).... if he did that though that would be unethical.

I have seen many a reputation destroyed over the internet. There are topics like this that come up all the time and when whoevers reputation or character is being questioned they come on to the board and tell their side of the story, and if they did nothing wrong then everyone moves on.

I am surprised Joe has been so quiet, after all anyone can google search his eBay name and this stuff now appears, if it was my name and integrity being questioned I would certainly come online and tell my side of the story.

I can appreciate you sticking up for your friend, but you don't know the facts...maxcollector69 does and Joe may certainly have info to share if he so chooses.

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Brian You and the OP do not have have not a single shread of evidence that Joe bought the card from maxcollector69. Joe responded to the OP and answered his question on how he acquired the card. The card was not stolen so it would be wrong for him to tell you or anyone the name of who traded him the card. Again it is none of your business.
Don't you get that it is wrong to say things like I would bet anyone he is "guilty" and "stop by his booth at the national" without any proof that he did anything unethical. Who appointed you guys judge jury and executioner?
I personally would not contact an Ebay seller and offer him more for an item after it already sold. But in this case the only person who acted in a way that harmed the OP is MAXCOLLECTOR69. He made the decision to not ship the card and to lie about why. He made the decision to sell the card to someone else. Joe took the card in on trade NOTHING UNETHICAL OR ILLEGAL about that. If it was then I have been a criminal since I was 8 years old and started trading baseball cards.

As for Tim yes a promise is a promise and stupid is as stupid does. Next time please read the post and if you don't understand it ..then best not to respond to it.

I would suggest that you 3 owe an apology to Joe but I know self righteous guys like you rarely have the guts to admit you were wrong. And that a complete lack of evidence only makes the conspiracy more real. But standing up for the wrongly accused (Those accused despite any evidence to indicate they did anything wrong) is always the right thing to do. If Joe did anything at all wrong I think it will come out but you don't convict people and wait for the evidence to show up.
Jonathan Sterling

[Republicaninmass]

Ebay clearly states that when you agree to purchase a card from a seller, it is a binding agreement. Are we to say that is unilateral, and the binding agreement doesnt bind the (original) seller in this case?

What about stolen property? The (second) seller wouldn't even be reimbursed, he'd have to go after who he purchased it from. The authorities would just take the card into evidence.

There are enough attorneys on the board that we can just write off (and laugh at) most of the other posters. Those which are simply conjecture and speculation what the law is, how it reads, or what can hold up in court.

[SMPEP]

Brian - it's even worse than you say. Joe doesn't even need to google himself to see his name in this thread. He's been directly TOLD by at least two Board members that this thread exists. And his only response has been to date has been "must be my lucky day." He is well informed that this thread exists - he obviously just doesn't care to respond. I'll let folks draw their own conclusions on what that means.

Cheers,
Patrick

[steve B]

Originally Posted by BLongley

Nothing unethical or illegal about trading for it, or unethical or illegal if he bought it, and nothing illegal if he interfered with Dmitrys transaction (although eBay would be less than thrilled for loosing transaction fees and having shenanigans taking place through their company's business, but we know it happens all the time).... if he did that though that would be unethical.

Nothing illegal if he interfered with it?

This is of course an amateur opinion as I'm not a lawyer, but....

Ebay states in a couple places in their user agreement that a sale is a contract between buyer and seller. They used to have language like that every time I listed stuff, but it's been a while so they might not have that reminder for sellers anymore.

And from Wikipedia

"Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when one person intentionally damages someone else's contractual or business relationships with a third party causing economic harm.[1] For example, someone could use blackmail to induce a contractor into breaking a contract or they could obstruct someone's ability to honor a contract with a client by deliberately refusing to deliver necessary goods.[2]

So I'd say interfering with a completed sale on Ebay is illegal.
That's not to say that it might be hard to prove, or more expensive to sue over than the item.

[BLongley]

Ok, maybe it is illegal, I don't know either, I was just responding to the other post...and stating that trading for cards in general is not illegal or unethical, which is what that poster was saying...that Joe or anyone can trade for things, what's wrong with that"....and I was then saying nothing, but if Joe had interfered with the transaction that it was at a minimum unethical. I am on the OPs side on this and question the whole thing. I was the one that found the card suddenly for sale again and notified Dmitry about its reappearance....

Originally Posted by steve B

Nothing illegal if he interfered with it?

This is of course an amateur opinion as I'm not a lawyer, but....

Ebay states in a couple places in their user agreement that a sale is a contract between buyer and seller. They used to have language like that every time I listed stuff, but it's been a while so they might not have that reminder for sellers anymore.

And from Wikipedia

"Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when one person intentionally damages someone else's contractual or business relationships with a third party causing economic harm.[1] For example, someone could use blackmail to induce a contractor into breaking a contract or they could obstruct someone's ability to honor a contract with a client by deliberately refusing to deliver necessary goods.[2]

So I'd say interfering with a completed sale on Ebay is illegal.
That's not to say that it might be hard to prove, or more expensive to sue over than the item.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by BLongley

Ok, maybe it is illegal, I don't know either, I was just responding to the other post...and stating that trading for cards in general is not illegal or unethical, which is what that poster was saying...that Joe or anyone can trade for things, what's wrong with that"....and I was then saying nothing, but if Joe had interfered with the transaction that it was at a minimum unethical. I am on the OPs side on this and question the whole thing. I was the one that found the card suddenly for sale again and notified Dmitry about its reappearance....

Ok.

That wasn't meant as ripping you, just adding that yes, interfering is sometimes illegal.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Brian You and the OP do not have have not a single shread of evidence that Joe bought the card from maxcollector69. Joe responded to the OP and answered his question on how he acquired the card. The card was not stolen so it would be wrong for him to tell you or anyone the name of who traded him the card.

So if the card was 'stolen' then it would be ok for the new seller to give the info of who traded him the card. So now there are reasons that info should be disclosed.

Well the poster is basically claiming fraud because he was told the card/case was damaged which was the reason for the non sale and he is alleging there is nothing wrong with the card. So whether the card was 'stolen' 'fraud' some other bad deed, it would appear you really cant just say its none of his business to see how the new seller got the card...others can disagree but i dont think its so simple to say its none of his business