Quote:
Originally Posted by danmckee
Thank you Adam. Yes law enforcement was not interested at all. And actually, it was a PSA graded card and the scammer didn't actually say he didn't get it, he said that it "was not as described" and American Express did the charge back just before their 9 month max window for charge backs.
Also, they didn't even make the buyer return the item!!
Some of the responses here are exactly why I no longer frequent this board.
If you know-it-alls ever have a card stolen or lost and have to go through what I did with PSA or what my friend did here, then you would understand.
I agree with you that theft is theft but as Adam stated, law enforcement couldn't be bothered and said to handle it in court which is a joke.
This is all I am going to say on this matter and anyone who would like details can look at my past threads here on the new board as I posted as soon as the card was hocked.
I posted this because I felt Brian Drent deserved some good feedback for what he did.
My work is done here and I can't wait to get off of this board.
Dan
|
Dan,
With respect, do you not see that there are two innocents here? There is the one who originally got scammed, and there is the innocent consignor who bought the card not knowing of the scam.
Many of the posters have simply made the point that Brian's conduct prefers one of these innocents over the other. In this case, he preferred the interests of a third party over the interests of the consignor who trusted him to sell his card and do his best for him.
That is not the obvious right thing to do - at least in the eyes of many posters (some of whom are lawyers). And as some have pointed out, the law recognizes many ways to obtain proper legal title to goods that were once stolen or obtained by questionable means. Neither the law nor the moral high-ground in this matter necessarily side with the guy who was originally scammed. You are assuming that to be the case and that is your view, but people don't have to agree with you.
Cheers,
Blair