Opinions on a transaction issue

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

I don't know how to reitterate what happened any more. If you think I'm not telling you the "truth" as to what happened, fine.. believe that, but please don't portray me as being dishonest.

The lot had a card of a great player that I had never seen before. So I decided to try to buy it offline fearing it may go for a lot of money, but also wanting to get it so I can find out what it was. We agreed to a sale and I paid for the cards right away. Weeks go by the package never arrives, its presumed lost and then 5 months later is back online, with same seller who now says it was retuned to him last week.... and he had done some more research on them since then and decided to relist, despite my persistent emails letting him know I was still interested.

Now my best bet is to win the auction straight up and hope I don't get screwed again.

If me posting on this forum to talk about the situation to see if anyone had ever had a similar one was wrong, let me know... but I figured it was okay because this is a forum, it involves a vintage card and clearly many on here are willing to read the thread and try to assist.

-Kyle-

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

Oh gosh if you're going to bring up the Larry Block crap, you are no better than Larry. If you'd like me to copy and paste all 5 emails from Larry apologizing for being terrible in the deal, I will. But now you're just being wrong.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Kyle: my point is not that you are not being truthful but this: if you want people to give an opinion on a situation that means anything, you need to give them ALL the relevant facts not just selective ones. You STILL haven't mentioned what cards are involved, or what the reason for the misunderstanding as to value is.

[Archive]

Posted By: Daniel Bretta

Here's a clue for all of you guys trying to get people to end auctions early:

STOP IT!!!!

I have no sympathy for anyone who got screwed on a deal after they got the seller to end the auction early. It's irritating to see auctions ended early that I had either bid on or was watching.

[Archive]

Posted By: DJ

Dan, you are 100% correct. Bravo!

DJ

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

Peter, I did tell you the misunderstanding of the value: both of us did not know what cards they were. Neither had seen them before.

As for not telling the identity of the cards, I don't want to advertise an auction I plan on bidding on.

[Archive]

Posted By: rob

You admit trying to do a deal off ebay, which is against the rules. I don't dispute your facts at all, but put them into a full context you don't refute.

And I don't believe the seller mailed out the item either, because he waited for that listing to drop from Ebay's database to relist. You're legally right in such a scenario, but unless you saved that whole listing to image files, you don't even have proof it existed for small claims court, although the seller may have a claim that you're defaming him if you're going "to out him".

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Well at least you now admit why you won't identify. Earlier you claimed "I will identify after today, I am just giving the seller another day to make good."

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

I do have all the images from the original and current listing. Thats how I was able to clearly see they are the identical cards.

And I did give the seller a day to contact me, and he did. After hearing from him, my best chance to to win it.

I still don't get where I was dishonest.

dis·hon·est P Pronunciation Key (ds-nst)
adj.
Disposed to lie, cheat, defraud, or deceive.
Resulting from or marked by a lack of honesty.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I'm not Kreskin, but even I figured out that the real reason he wasn't giving details about the exact card or the dealer was that the card he wanted was in a current auction and didn't want others looking at it and thinking about bidding on it. Given the recent history of pointing out active auctions, no one but new posters are going to mentioning live auctions.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Jay, of course that is the real reason, not the one he originally claimed (giving the seller time to make good before he "outed" him).

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

Both are reasons.

I finally got a response to my emails this morning. Not advertising is also a reason.

What more do you want me to say?

[Archive]

Posted By: DJ

This is an interesting thread.

So Kyle, the reason you don't want to reveal the items in question is because they are in a current auction that you are planning on bidding on.

So you are giving this seller a second chance, despite the fact that he probably lied about getting these items out?

DJ

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

I emailed the seller asking if these are the same cards I had purchased last August. This morning I finally got this response:

Hi Kyle,
Believe it or not, the package actually came in on Friday morning. It was wrapped in a plastic bag, totally crushed and shredded.....with stamps all over it reading "Damaged in Machinery - Return to Sender". Since I refunded your money and it was such a long time ago I figured I'd just sell them again. Quite a coincidence. I do apologize for the whole transaction, but it was completely out of my hands!



Since theres no other way for me to get them now, other than winning, I am going to wait to show the auction.

Does that make sense?

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Miraculously the cards weren't damaged haha. Ask him for a scan of the package.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

I am fairly sure he is lying and wouldn't be able to produce a picture. Or he'd say his camera is broken. Plus, after 5 months and now they magically show up, its obvious he was never truthful.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

I think I may use this fact scenario for my final exam next semester! I'm sure a bunch of 1Ls would love it!

I think we're all in agreement that any lawyer who would take this on a contingency should take "Law Practice Management" again and any lawyer who would take it on an hourly basis should put his/her E&O carrier on notice.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

For some strange reason Larry Block is looking a lil better today.


Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Daniel Bretta

Kyle, if you'd just let the auction run its course 5 months ago you might have the cards already.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

That deal is over, the card has been returned and everything is fine now. But if you're seriously going to bring that up into this, here, enjoy:

(Sent this morning, 01/02/06)
Kyle,
Once again, I can't apologize enough. I am truly sorry for my lack of communication.

Here is exactly what Joe said to me. Joe agreed that according to there qualifying outlines for grading hand cut cards, that the card does not meat it, but it measure right and they will stand behind the grade. I pushed several times as I've had to in the past. The final time Joe spoke with me about the card he stated very clearly that "They under NO circumstances will buy the card back." Joe also said that in his opinion the card in a large auction house such as Mastro would bring in huge money. Even more then the $5,000 you were first asking.

There it is. I am truly giving up profit on the card, and I knew it when I sent it back to you. I at the time of my arguing with you, before realizing my fault. I had told you on the PSA board that I was sending it back. So, I felt there was no other choice. If I changed my mind and sent you $2,000, regardless of the reason, they would really pounce on me for the flip flop on the decision. I love the card.

I Thank you very much for you giving me the chance in the first place, and sorry for turning it into a hassle for you.

I wish you nothing but the best in the new year and many to come.

Sincerely,
Lawrence Block
Block Sportscards, Inc.


(sent 12/25/05)
Kyle,

Here is the tracking info.

USPS Delivery Confirmation: 0305-2710-0001-5466-XXX

Once again, I apologize for not keeping in contact with you and letting this get to the point it did.

Thank you anyhow, and happy holidays

Sincerely,
Lawrence Block
Block Sportscards, Inc.




(Sent 12/23/05)
Kyle,

I am sorry for not keeping closer contact with you as I should have. Sometimes we/I forget just how much $2000 is to some. We deal with so much money in value that it starts to make $2000 seem small. I know that it isn't a small amount. When I think of $2000 in household bills then I realize the true value.

All I can say is that I am truly sorry.

Lawrence Block

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

Hey Daniel,

Yeah, I know it. But at the time, I didn't know what the cards were and hoped to get them at best of price as possible. I've learned my lessons on it, especially to pay the extra money for overnighting items, fully insured. I do agree that ending auctions early can backfire, but they can also be very beneficial.

-Kyle-

[Archive]

Posted By: Daniel Bretta

STOP DOING IT - YOU'RE MAKING THOSE OF US WHO PLAY BY THE RULES MAD!

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I don't know the facts of the original agreement or purhase and it should be in no way construed that I am accusing either original buyer or seller of cheating. But, as a rule of thumb, I don't think people who cheat should complain about others cheating. If (and I say if) the original purchase ended an auction early when there were active bidders and was consumated off eBay against eBay's rules, the buyer not only okayed but presumably inititated some of the seller's rule breaking. It would be difficult to stomach if the buyer, out no money, later claimed he was wronged because he didn't okay all the cheating.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

And to think this is a HOBBY.


Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: rob

A sale takes place as a result of an Ebay listing where Ebay doesn't get a commission for the sale. Fits your precise definition of "defraud". Thats where the dishonesty comes in. That Ebay is a gang of monopolistic jerks that jack up commissions at will can be an excellent rationalization for such dishonesty, but its not justification.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

I'm with Dan on this one, I have no sympathy for a bad transaction if you have to break the rules to do it.

If you do come to a forum with questions you certainly can't expect all the responses to be positive towards you. You have to take the good with the bad. If you have some history to get dug up it will, so if the bad comes up you should not be surprised.

Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

I am fine with all the comments and I like hearing everyone's opinion on the matter. It broadens my view on the topic. But I do take exception to the ones about my history. I don't have any negative history. I've run a string of bad luck with choosing the wrong people to deal with, but as far as credibility goes, I've got nothing against me... and trying to tie that into a thread I believe is wrong.

http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback&userid=superbonbon


-Kyle-

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

Kyle,

My statement was in general on the whole topic. People tend to go to the board and want and expect only positive to come oout of it, which is the hope of all, and don't seem to like it when dirt is dug up. Heck, my brother and I take a beating every once in awhile for voicing our opinions and the only dirt they seem to dig up is name calling it seems to come with the territory but our reputations stand for themselves.

Good Luck with the deal,

Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

ok..............Larry also said this:

Thursday December 22, 2005 11:08 PM (NEW!)



This guy (Kyle) is not telling the whole story here all.

Yes, I have had problems with being slow, but I have never, and never will steal or anything else dishonest as he is trying to get you to believe.

Here are some facts that he conveniently left out.

1.) I only got the card Monday the 19th

2.) He didn't notify me he was overnighting until the day it was to arrive, and I told him I was out of town that I would get it Monday (the 19th)

3.) I let him know from the start that the card should not have been graded. It is a hand cut card. The card does not have the dotted lines as it is required to in order to receive a grade from PSA. Read this in the SMR under "hand cut cards" Here is an item number from when he listed it on eBay for $4999.00 : 8733494411. Now why would he sell to me for 2k when he wanted 5k for it. I feel because he realized the card isn't worth it, and should not be in the 8 holder.

4.) I get the card 12-19-05, and on 12-21-05 he makes this posting on here, that a stole his card, and is calling the police. Come on Kyle what kind of person are you???????????????????????????

5.) I sat down with Joe Orlando (PSA President) today regarding this card and Kyle. I am NOT doing anything dishonest or hiding anything to or from anybody. I may have been slow as you can read on this thread, but you will not see that I ripped ANYBODY OFF.

I HAVE A MILLION THING TO SAY ABOUT THIS, BUT I WILL WAIT UNTIL I HAVE CALMED DOWN SOME, SO THAT I DO NOT GET CRAZY. GOD KNOWS I HAVE THE RIGHT TO ABOUT KYLE AND THIS CARD.

>>>>>>>>>>>>KYLE, YOU SHOULD TRY BEING MORE FORTHCOMING WITH YOUR STORIES<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

WELL, BOARD MEMBERS. LIKE ME OR NOT, YOU CAN SEE I DO NOT STEAL AS KYLE SAYS. MAKE UP YOUR OWN MINDS NOW THAT THE WHOLE STORY IS IN THE OPEN.

Sorry to all of you to whom I shipped card too slowly, and thank you for your business.


Sincerely,
Slow, but honest Block Sportscards, Inc.



__________________________________________________ _________________________________

So you see Kyle IMO you do have a credibility problem.

In this thread you also stated you would not divulge the name of the dealer until after today as you wanted to allow him another day.

YOu then LATER stated that you are bidding on it and do not want to mention the name.

Had you IMO done that from the beginning you may not have had the Block issue brought up.

One thing I learned from your situation with Block is that I jumped to a conclusion w.o hearing his side. So I will not assume that your seller LIED to you just on your word.

JMO


Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

Steve,

Your opinion is appreciated, but what Block did post there was not entirely true either.

1. The card arrived the Thursday before and I spoke to him on the phone and he said he would be getting it Friday afternoon. (I can't prove this as I don't record my phone conversations)

2. I emailed him the day I shipped it saying I was overnighting it. (I could prove this). Go to www.usps.com and enter in this tracking number: EQ14 3555 288 US

I'll save you time... this is what it says:
Label/Receipt Number: EQ14 3555 288U S
Status: Delivered

Your item was delivered at 12:16 pm on December 15, 2005 in UPLAND, CA 91786. The item was signed for by B SI.


3. He did let me know that, and all the other stuff here was his opinion and appearantly why he originally bought the card and what his intentions were.

4. I gave him many days to respond to my emails and phone calls. A little threat to call the police can go a long way.

5. Yes he appearantly did sit down with Joe Orlando, but this still doesn't reflect on me.


If you read the 8th message into this thread, you'll see:
"Its frustrating, but looks like I might have to win them out right if I want them.

-Kyle-" (there's a hint that I still want them and might bid on them)


I'm not foolish enough to promote an auction I want to win. I could lose out on the item or end up spending an extra couple hundred dollars on it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

Kyle


Im saddened that any of this type of crap happens in our hobby

I wish you all the best in 06

I of course wish all a great 06


I was just peeved at myself for jumping to a conclusion in your previous situation w/o hearing the other persons side.



Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

Thanks for your wishes, same to you and your family.

-Kyle-

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Dan: you da man; I totally agree w/r/t ending auctions early--it is creepy. I posted some stuff during dime day and I've been deluged with end it early inquiries. Frankly, since ebay tells you how many people are watching your auctions, I would have to be crazy to end an auction early if several people are watching it. I especially have to laugh when the end it early message offers me less than my minimum bid.

Lawyers: I have to differ on the evidence issue. Preponderance of the evidence still requires a majority of supporting evidence. THE BUYER HAS NONE w/r/t whether the seller mailed the card and whether it came back. He wasn't there. Only the seller has the info. Anything the buyer suggests contrary to the seller's story lacks any foundation and asks the finder of fact to disregard the evidence. Any lawyer on his toes in court would object to that kind of evidence or argument. Plus, the buyer has the burden of proof. Credibility issues (assuming the seller comes off badly) do not allow the finder of fact to totally disregard the undisputed evidence and find in favor of a plaintiff who cannot otherwise prove his case. Well, maybe in Texas (I hear the common law down there is pretty strange )

Joann: Remember this little tidbit: every state has its own law of damages for fraud and most any other tort. There are surprising variants from the "norm" taught in law school.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd Schultz

Hope everything works out well in the end.

Adam, I must disagree with your evidence analysis. Fundamentally, the trier of fact is free to disregard whatever the seller says--they may conclude he is a liar. If they do, they have evidence that the card was never mailed. They also have inferences-- from the buyer's testimony that the card never arrived, and from the fact that the seller relisted the card later, that it was never sent. This is all admissible. Because buyer needs only prove that he performed (paid) and seller did not (card never received), he has met his burden of establishing a prima facie case (leaving aside the uniqueness and irreparable harm elements required for specific perfomance and/or injunctive relief).

To embrace your analysis, a seller would have a hard time ever being in the wrong--he could just testify that he performed (mailed the card) and the buyer would not be able to prove otherwise. I disagree that the law places the parties in those positions as a matter of evidence.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe P.

1. It's about a sneak undermining an eBay auction.
The pot calling the kettle black. .... (Where's Mr Ethics?)

2. It has nothing whatsoever to do with vintage.

3. It's all about: (A)Grading (B)Slabbing and (C)Flipping, but that's all right because this is more of a grading and flipping forum, and vintage is somewhat of an off topic that happens.

Kyle, let me see if I understand this correctly?
You want us to feel that you're the victim, and that we should feel sorry for you after the results of your success in convincing a seller to close an auction early? ...

Sorry amigo, you can tell your story to current flippers, but not to this collector.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

Thanks Todd - my point exactly.

Rob - just an fyi - a case does not have to go into small claims court just because it involves a small dollar amount. The district courts of almost any state will share original jurisdiction over such cases. Even if it went to small claims, most state's small claims courts afford a direct right of appeal to the district courts with a de novo review of the facts (which of course means you can also have a jury).

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

Here's the cards and the seller. I had originally bought them for $160. We both didn't know what they were and worked out the deal. Five months later:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6240741892

[Archive]

Posted By: zach

Man, 1300 for those was a steal. Just the Jones and the Ruth combined are worth over 2k.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

Wow. I don't even know about these kinds of cards, but between the scans (which he organized very well) and the sell price, you must be just sick about it. $160. Wow.

J

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

Kyle,

I'm not sure what those cards are but apparently there are a few people that do. You offered $160 and never received the cards but you did get your money back.

My guess is that at least one other person who knew what they were contacted the seller and he got sellers remorse and backed out of the deal.

Basically, your offer was only about an eighth of the ending bid from the auction you posted. Do you think you gave him a fair offer? I would be willing to bet that a lot of people are thinking the same thing - you low balled the seller, he found out and he didn't ship the material. It's kind of cheesey on his part but then again percentage wise you really didn't provide him a "fair" offer. Now, if the auction closed at $160 and he reneged then that's a different story.

That's my opionion on the transaction. You should have told him to set it up on a BIN that way he would have been obligated to sell it to you - I hope I'm not giving you any ideas...

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

I didn't know those were the Doughnut Co. cards until September... I searched and searched and searched online until one day I trickled across the SGC set registry (was searching for Rockne and Grange). Later I came across an old Mastronet auction and their identities were 100% confirmed. Had I known what they were and their value, I could have offered more. I am being honest here, I would not low ball a person like that. Getting a good deal is one thing, but trying to screw someone out of a lot of money is another.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kyle

The thing is is that the seller said he shipped them the day before he went on his honeymoon. After returning a week later, I contacted him about the package as I hadn't received it. He said give it a few more days, I did, and then he refunded my money.

In the end, its over... nothing I can do and I hope the seller is happy, and so is the buyer. I really wanted that Bobby Jones.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

Kyle,

My apologies. I thought you knew what they were. If you didn't then someone did and the seller figured out that he could get a lot more for the cards.

I wouldn't have thought twice about those cards if I saw them.

[Archive]

Posted By: rob

We all know that these are 1937 Doughnut Corporation of America cards. Even with the relist, the cards weren't properly described nor in optimal categories. Still looks like a good buy, given the prices realized in recent Ebay, Mastronet and Lew Lipset auctions (which seem nutty). As for Kyle claiming he didn't know what the cards were when he persuaded the seller to end an auction early, do you really think you're fooling anyone here?

[Archive]

Posted By: zach

Now that I see these cards, I can't believe you offered him 3 dollars a card. Even if you didnt know what they were like you claim, 3 dollars a card ? I am with Fred and the person probably got an email stating what they were really worth. Come on man, not trying to be hard on you but do you really think offering a guy 3 bucks for a babe ruth or bobby jones card was fair ?

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

............and then he (seller) had a sick feeling....

Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

I got to disagree with you yet again.

I would have had no idea what those cards were (and I consider myself a fairly knowledgeable collector) if I saw them. Frankly, they are ugly as sin and I wouldnt have offered a seller more than a buck a card if, for some unknown reason, I had a desire to purchase them - which I probably never would. I dont think its that far-fetched to believe someone made an offer on the cards without knowing exactly what they were worth - heck the seller didnt know what they were worth either. Its funny, everyone likes to quote "buyer beware" but once a buyer gets a good deal, everyone assumes he must have lowballed the seller. Does anyone think a seller has some responsiblity to know what it is he is selling?

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

By the way, if someone told me their 5 year old drew those cards, I'd have believed him. So less than three bucks for a crappy ruth - sure, I have no problem with that.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Kyle didn't do anything wrong making the guy an offer (leaving aside the ebay rule) unless he KNEW they were worth more, and I believe him when he says he didn't, and the seller should have kept his promise as a matter of contract law. There was no mistake about the subject matter of the bargain, just the value, and in that case a deal is a deal. That said, when you consider all the facts and circumstances, it's hard to blame the seller for backing out, and I think Kyle should have been more understanding about why he did and not tried to get something for nothing.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Koteles

what happened to possession is 9/10 of the law???

When we want something and it doesnt work out ,sure
our natural reaction is to be a little mad. He recieved his money back and maybe given back postage and a 20$
kicker for his time. Isnt the end or the world.

Children are starving all over the world and......