pwcc (part two)

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by calvindog

I would say that your knowledge of what went into the determination to indict Mastro -- which is what you're referring to -- is wrong. I would also say that the idea that the Feds are the only prosecutorial body available to handle fraud such as we've seen here is also incorrect.

As far as I can tell, no prosecutorial body has been overly enthusiastic about combating ebay fraud. That might be because ebay is a $50billion business with shareholders who include hedge funds and billionaires, and those people don't want to see lawsuits regarding ebay in the news since it is bad P.R. for ebay. If the worst example you have is a $500 hockey card, then the $500 hockey card is 1/100,000,000th of the assets of ebay. To say that you are financially over-matched is to be putting it mildly.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

As far as I can tell, no prosecutorial body has been overly enthusiastic about combating ebay fraud. That might be because ebay is a $50billion business with shareholders who include hedge funds and billionaires, and those people don't want to see lawsuits regarding ebay in the news since it is bad P.R. for ebay. If the worst example you have is a $500 hockey card, then the $500 hockey card is 1/100,000,000th of the assets of ebay. To say that you are financially over-matched is to be putting it mildly.

LOL why are you discussing something of which you have no idea? Do you think prosecutors simply take as evidence just what people on Net 54 dig up? Or do they send out subpoenas and conduct an investigation? Do you think that a red dot on a single card is the iceberg itself or just the tip?

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by calvindog

LOL why are you discussing something of which you have no idea? Do you think prosecutors simply take as evidence just what people on Net 54 dig up? Or do they send out subpoenas and conduct an investigation? Do you think that a red dot on a single card is the iceberg itself or just the tip?

Well, you're the legal genius. If not the feds, then what prosecutorial body is going to investigate this?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

Well, you're the legal genius. If not the feds, then what prosecutorial body is going to investigate this?

Sorry, I'm off to federal court to do a hobby-related sentencing for fraud. After you spend another night in a Holiday Inn Express I'm sure the answer will come to you. Again.

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Sorry, I'm off to federal court to do a hobby-related sentencing for fraud. After you spend another night in a Holiday Inn Express I'm sure the answer will come to you. Again.

That sounds a lot like you don't know.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

That sounds a lot like you don't know.

Yeah, it would be tough for a criminal lawyer who practices in federal and state courts all over the country to be able to list the law enforcement offices which prosecute fraud. Why don't you stick to what you know -- whatever it is you've been repeating for the past 9000 posts on this and the other PWCC thread?

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Yeah, it would be tough for a criminal lawyer who practices in federal and state courts all over the country to be able to list the law enforcement offices which prosecute fraud. Why don't you stick to what you know -- whatever it is you've been repeating for the past 9000 posts on this and the other PWCC thread?

But who, specifically, do you think we ought to call? You having been repeatedly urging us to take action. Which specific action should we take? You're the criminal lawyer, so you'd know better than any of us who to call, right?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

Well, you're the legal genius. If not the feds, then what prosecutorial body is going to investigate this?

I will help you out with a few....Postal Inspectors, local law enforcement., Secret Service, Dept. of Homeland Security.....and as you mentioned (I think) the FBI.....

And if you find fraud, spread wide enough, then some of these agencies would be interested. They won't be as interested in a particular event unless it's a big one. And as taxpayers we wouldn't want them investigating every $100 fraud.

I do agree ebay does very little, from what I have seen, to prevent fraud on their site.

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by Leon

I will help you out with a few....Postal Inspectors, local law enforcement., Secret Service, Dept. of Homeland Security.....and as you mentioned (I think) the FBI.....

And if you find fraud, spread wide enough, then some of these agencies would be interested. They won't be as interested in a particular event unless it's a big one. And as taxpayers we wouldn't want them investigating every $100 fraud.

I do agree ebay does very little, from what I have seen, to prevent fraud on their site.

Well, so far we have proof of fraud on one $653 hockey card. But the fraud isn't for $653, it's for the difference in sale price between the time it sold without the dot and the time it sold with the dot. $653 minus $542.73 equals $110.27 worth of fraud.

I've been told by the FBI that they won't bother with anything under 20k worth of fraud, so we have a long way to go there. As for postal inspectors, I doubt they are interested in ebay scans. We can cross that off the list. The Dept of Homeland Security just deals with things coming into the country, so that's a no.

So does that only leaves PWCC's local police department as our only option? I agree with Leon, it's hard to imagine bothering anyone over $110.27 worth of fraud.

[prestigecollectibles]

Unless I missed it, nobody mentioned anything about monitors. I use a Samsung 26" HD monitor with my PC. I also have a notebook, tablet and smartphone and I am sure the same scan will look different on each one. While I agree the scan should accurately represent the card that doesn't mean the person with a crappy monitor will view it as such.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by prestigecollectibles

Unless I missed it, nobody mentioned anything about monitors. I use a Samsung 26" HD monitor with my PC. I also have a notebook, tablet and smartphone and I am sure the same scan will look different on each one. While I agree the scan should accurately represent the card that doesn't mean the person with a crappy monitor will view it as such.

Do you mean that the same scan would look different on your Samsung 26" HD monitor than it would on my monitor pictured below?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

Well, so far we have proof of fraud on one $653 hockey card. But the fraud isn't for $653, it's for the difference in sale price between the time it sold without the dot and the time it sold with the dot. $653 minus $542.73 equals $110.27 worth of fraud.

I've been told by the FBI that they won't bother with anything under 20k worth of fraud, so we have a long way to go there. As for postal inspectors, I doubt they are interested in ebay scans. We can cross that off the list. The Dept of Homeland Security just deals with things coming into the country, so that's a no.

So does that only leaves PWCC's local police department as our only option? I agree with Leon, it's hard to imagine bothering anyone over $110.27 worth of fraud.

Actually, 20k, from my experience, wouldn't make an FBI investigative list. On the other hand, Postal Inspectors, will be interested in ebay stuff as almost everything (with some exceptions) gets sent through the email. But, no, I don't see them investigating $100 of fraud specifically. With Secret Service and Homeland Security, they get interested in the forgeries, monies used for them and international stuff...and there are a lot of those things to look at. I have spoken with each of the agencies I have listed, more than once. I applaud law enforcement for helping us...