@ifthevamzarockin said:
Just admit you bought the wrong item and then looked for any reason to return or get a partial refund.
I will say it again you should revise your feedback on ebay you are very much in the wrong with this transaction.
Well because that is simply not the truth. When I wrote the seller I didn’t know at that time I had the wrong one, just that it was damaged. I had just opened it and saw it immediately.
If the seller had disclosed it on the eBay listing (he admits in thread above he knew about it!!) then maybe this would not have happened. But either way, I should have handled it better but it was still sold to me undisclosed with damage and I got no reply when I inquired and offered some opportunity to make things whole. My review is the truth!
@Che_Grapes said:
But either way, I should have handled it better but it was still sold to me undisclosed with damage and I got no reply when I inquired and offered some opportunity to make things whole.
It is not damaged. You keep using that word even though it does not apply.
While clearly, Che_Grapes could and should have handled the situation much better, I don’t think he’s the terrible villain that some seem to believe he is.
I’m the one who notified him of this thread, as I had a feeling that he was unaware of it. And he’s now faced the angry crowd and handled himself much better than many others in his shoes would have.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld said:
While clearly, Che_Grapes could and should have handled the situation much better, I don’t think he’s the terrible villain that some seem to believe he is.
I don't think he's a terrible villain. I also don't think he's helping himself any by continuing to claim the medal was damaged.
So you looked at the ebay listing and didn't notice you were bidding on the wrong item/year.
Then you have it in hand and don't notice you have the wrong year but you notice a small defect.
Ebay sellers can't look at an auction listing for you, please be responsible with your actions & bids.
I don't think he's a terrible villain. I also don't think he's helping himself any by continuing to claim the medal was damaged.
Yes I do understand, it may not be ‘post-mint’ damage but the actions i am referring to above occurred at a time when I believed it was damaged. So I’m referring to actions that occurred before I knew that. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
@Che_Grapes said:
I do want to sell it and if someone showed interest I would certainly disclose the damage...
Why not disclose the damage in your original offer?
You are right, I should have - and I didn’t disclose price either. But if there had been interest I would have sent pictures and gone from there.
Meanwhile - I do note that the seller admits he knew about the damage (even provided his own photo) in the thread above, yet sold it to me without disclosing it on the eBay listing and with no refund policy! Just sayin!
"Damage" implies that something happened to it AFTER it was struck. "Defect" implies that it is still as it was made, with a manufacturing flaw. So, technically, the piece in question is a "defect", not "damage".
@Che_Grapes said:
I do want to sell it and if someone showed interest I would certainly disclose the damage...
Why not disclose the damage in your original offer?
You are right, I should have - and I didn’t disclose price either. But if there had been interest I would have sent pictures and gone from there.
Meanwhile - I do note that the seller admits he knew about the damage (even provided his own photo) in the thread above, yet sold it to me without disclosing it on the eBay listing and with no refund policy! Just sayin!
"Damage" implies that something happened to it AFTER it was struck. "Defect" implies that it is still as it was made, with a manufacturing flaw. So, technically, the piece in question is a "defect", not "damage".
And I don't think it is unreasonable for @Che_Grapes to have expected the DEFECT to have been noted.
It is also reasonable for him to have expected a response. Even if negative, to his request for mitigation.
This is an unfortunate transaction with errors on both sides.
I have an idea on how to make this thing whole thing go away (including the defect).
If Che_Grapes will retract the negative feedback, I will purchase the piece for $200.
Then I will take some smaller dies and over-strike it in the area of the defect to obliterate the defect.
Then I will auction the over-struck piece on eBay. Everybody wins.
PM me if interested.
@dcarr said:
I have an idea on how to make this thing whole thing go away (including the defect).
If Che_Grapes will retract the negative feedback, I will purchase the piece for $200.
Then I will take some smaller dies and over-strike it in the area of the defect to obliterate the defect.
Then I will auction the over-struck piece on eBay. Everybody wins.
PM me if interested.
Is the item in question one that is described as or guaranteed to be flawless as struck? Issues such as this one could be avoided if those expecting perfection were to get a positive confirmation of their assumption from the seller before making their purchase.
-- The buyer posted this feedback March 17th:
The item was nice except it had some minor damage which I photographed and sent full description and clear photos to the seller with a letter asking for some way to resolve it with maybe a partial refund or some explanation, since I paid full retail price (and then some) for the item - I received neither, seller never wrote me back after 5 business days so I’m forced to write this review - first negative one I’ve ever written!! Won’t purchase here again.
1917-2017 Dan Carr WWI Centennial Commemorative 50mm 2oz 999 Silver HIGH RELIEF
-- My reply to the above feedback was posted March 19th:
This buyer's message to me stated: "Prior to posting any review I just wanted to see if this is something we can first resolve. Would you be willing to refund 100 dollars?" I reported this to ebay as a violation of the Feedback Extortion Policy. Pending ebay's review, I am not messaging the buyer directly. Also, the small imperfections photographed by the buyer are not damage. They are a result of the minting process. Buyer claims this item would get a "details no-grade", which is not true.
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
It would be nice if the buyer revised his feedback, yet really- it doesn't matter as eBay will do so for the seller once the facts are cited in a complaint with them.
I also concur the buyer shouldn't be vilified, perhaps only scolded a bit for his lack of self-awareness.
@dcarr said:
I have an idea on how to make this thing whole thing go away (including the defect).
If Che_Grapes will retract the negative feedback, I will purchase the piece for $200.
Then I will take some smaller dies and over-strike it in the area of the defect to obliterate the defect.
Then I will auction the over-struck piece on eBay. Everybody wins.
PM me if interested.
.
Thanks Dan. Maybe that'll finally settle this mess.
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
@dcarr said:
I have an idea on how to make this thing whole thing go away (including the defect).
If Che_Grapes will retract the negative feedback, I will purchase the piece for $200.
Then I will take some smaller dies and over-strike it in the area of the defect to obliterate the defect.
Then I will auction the over-struck piece on eBay. Everybody wins.
PM me if interested.
Class act!
I agree. And I want to show that classy post again, so am copying it here, in addition to having clicked “agree”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@dcarr said:
I have an idea on how to make this thing whole thing go away (including the defect).
If Che_Grapes will retract the negative feedback, I will purchase the piece for $200.
Then I will take some smaller dies and over-strike it in the area of the defect to obliterate the defect.
Then I will auction the over-struck piece on eBay. Everybody wins.
PM me if interested.
If you get that settled I will buy that from you Dan just contact me after your done doing your fix, name your price and call it a done deal. I already own 2 of your 1917 pieces what’s another one, might as well make it 3! Let me know if you want it to come this way my offer stands however long it takes.
That's because larger items won't fit in their holder.
For example, the 2 oz Token purchased by the buyer is 50mm. If submitted to ANACS for grading, it would NOT be certified or graded simply because it's too big.
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
When an issue like this arrives, I tend to take sides. I look for character.
The buyer calls the piece a 'hard luck' piece in the BST. Says he didn't read the eBay listing close enough and bought in error. Says it will 'detail' grade even though no TPG will even take it as a submission. Attempts to rationalize his Attempts at eBay feedback extortion by demanding a 50% refund due to pmd when the item had no such damage.
Furthermore, has over 115 posts over the last 30 days and averages posts 6/7 days, some days with over 10 posts a day. With the exception of this thread and his BST offering which has not been responded to in three days. 'because he doesn't come on the forum all the time'. Although the threads are about him and his actions.
I'm sensing a pattern and I'm not even a detective.
@streeter said:
When an issue like this arrives, I tend to take sides. I look for character.
The buyer calls the piece a 'hard luck' piece in the BST. Says he didn't read the eBay listing close enough and bought in error. Says it will 'detail' grade even though no TPG will even take it as a submission. Attempts to rationalize his Attempts at eBay feedback extortion by demanding a 50% refund due to pmd when the item had no such damage.
Furthermore, has over 115 posts over the last 30 days and averages posts 6/7 days, some days with over 10 posts a day. With the exception of this thread and his BST offering which has not been responded to in three days. 'because he doesn't come on the forum all the time'. Although the threads are about him and his actions.
I'm sensing a pattern and I'm not even a detective.
He didn’t “demand “ a 50% refund or for that matter, anything.
And he responded here after I alerted him to the thread. At the time I did so, I think he’d been signed out for more than two days.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Furthermore Field,
I stand by my calcs on his freq of posting. You have the same info available to you. I don't believe in coincidence. He's here almost everyday until this episode comes up. You can believe anything you want. I don't see you offering him $200.
@streeter said:
From a complaining customer who bought a fairly-priced $200 item from me on ebay:
"Prior to posting any review I just wanted to see if this is something we can first resolve. Would you be willing to refund $100?"
Since I don't sell much on ebay, I'm wondering if anyone else receives that kind of message
Looks like 50% to me pal.
I had posted “ He didn’t “demand “ a 50% refund or for that matter, anything.
And he responded here after I alerted him to the thread. At the time I did so, I think he’d been signed out for more than two days.”
My math is fine, thank you. And you somehow omitted the “demand...” part.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@numisma said:
I am confused. Is the eBay buyer now selling the same coin on the BST while trying to get a partial refund? I am missing something here.
As I understand it, the eBay buyer has posted the coin on the BST forum. Before doing so, he had previously contacted the eBay seller about a reduced price. But the seller had blocked him, so although the seller replied, the reply didn’t get to the buyer (who is no longer trying to get a discount). Whew!😄
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld said:
He didn’t “demand “ a 50% refund or for that matter, anything.
You're right about not demanding anything. But then, in the feedback he left, he wrote "so I’m forced to write this review - first negative one I’ve ever written!!" To be fair, eBay does not force anybody to write reviews. If it wasn't for the buyer's assumption of "no striking flaws" in the manufacture of the token, this thread never happens.
So you know where I'm coming from, I'm reading this thread as an eBay seller who has received negative feedback from buyers who have made assumptions about what they were buying, that were never claimed by me to be so.
One other issue that bugs me is when people who want to be able to return an item that's not acceptable upon inspection buy from a seller who doesn't offer to accept returns and then insist on wanting to return the item nonetheless. The seller described the condition thusly:
@MFeld said:
He didn’t “demand “ a 50% refund or for that matter, anything.
You're right about not demanding anything. But then, in the feedback he left, he wrote "so I’m forced to write this review - first negative one I’ve ever written!!" To be fair, eBay does not force anybody to write reviews. If it wasn't for the buyer's assumption of "no striking flaws" in the manufacture of the token, this thread never happens.
So you know where I'm coming from, I'm reading this thread as an eBay seller who has received negative feedback from buyers who have made assumptions about what they were buying, that were never claimed by me to be so.
One other issue that bugs me is when people who want to be able to return an item that's not acceptable upon inspection buy from a seller who doesn't offer to accept returns and then insist on wanting to return the item nonetheless. The seller described the condition thusly:
Excellent condition! No hazing & no spotting.
Is that inaccurate? I don't think so.
I disagree...
with nothing you posted, 😉I rarely do.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I blame eBay for these sort of situations. They've tipped the field so far in favor of buyers that it makes most anyone trying to sell almost immediately suspicious of just about anything out of the ordinary.
I hope there are enough qualifiers in there, but if not let me know and I'll add a few more.
@numisma said:
I am confused. Is the eBay buyer now selling the same coin on the BST while trying to get a partial refund? I am missing something here.
As I understand it, the eBay buyer has posted the coin on the BST forum. Before doing so, he had previously contacted the eBay seller about a reduced price. But the seller had blocked him, so although the seller replied, the reply didn’t get to the buyer (who is no longer trying to get a discount). Whew!😄
.
Correct -- except that I haven't seen a retraction for his requested 50% discount.
Maybe I missed it. So I just now (again) reviewed his posts above and don't see a retraction.
I also haven't received anything from ebay that a partial refund is no longer an option.
So for now, as far as I know, his request for $100 partial refund is still active.
@COCollector said:
Correct -- except that I haven't seen a retraction for his requested 50% discount.
Maybe I missed it. So I just now (again) reviewed his posts above and don't see a retraction.
I also haven't received anything from ebay that a partial refund is no longer an option.
So for now, as far as I know, his request for $100 partial refund is still active.
If you've already blocked the buyer on eBay you might consider unblocking him until this issue is resolved in order that neither of you miss out on any messages sent.
@numisma said:
I am confused. Is the eBay buyer now selling the same coin on the BST while trying to get a partial refund? I am missing something here.
As I understand it, the eBay buyer has posted the coin on the BST forum. Before doing so, he had previously contacted the eBay seller about a reduced price. But the seller had blocked him, so although the seller replied, the reply didn’t get to the buyer (who is no longer trying to get a discount). Whew!😄
.
Correct -- except that I haven't seen a retraction for his requested 50% discount.
Maybe I missed it. So I just now (again) reviewed his posts above and don't see a retraction.
I also haven't received anything from ebay that a partial refund is no longer an option.
So for now, as far as I know, his request for $100 partial refund is still active.
Since he’s paid for the coin and now has it listed, I don’t see why there would be any reason to retract the request for a discount. It’s a moot point.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@COCollector said:
Correct -- except that I haven't seen a retraction for his requested 50% discount.
Maybe I missed it. So I just now (again) reviewed his posts above and don't see a retraction.
I also haven't received anything from ebay that a partial refund is no longer an option.
So for now, as far as I know, his request for $100 partial refund is still active.
If you've already blocked the buyer on eBay you might consider unblocking him until this issue is resolved in order that neither of you miss out on any messages sent.
.
Actually, I unblocked the buyer yesterday so that I could reply to his negative ebay feedback (my previous attempts to reply had failed).
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
@MasonG said:
I blame eBay for these sort of situations. They've tipped the field so far in favor of buyers that it makes most anyone trying to sell almost immediately suspicious of just about anything out of the ordinary.
I hope there are enough qualifiers in there, but if not let me know and I'll add a few more.
As a matter of fact, I have another suggested qualifier. Instead of “…I’ll add a few more”, how about “I might add a few more”? 😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MasonG said:
I blame eBay for these sort of situations. They've tipped the field so far in favor of buyers that it makes most anyone trying to sell almost immediately suspicious of just about anything out of the ordinary.
I hope there are enough qualifiers in there, but if not let me know and I'll add a few more.
As a matter of fact, I have another suggested qualifier. Instead of “…I’ll add a few more”, how about “I might add a few more”? 😉
@numisma said:
I am confused. Is the eBay buyer now selling the same coin on the BST while trying to get a partial refund? I am missing something here.
As I understand it, the eBay buyer has posted the coin on the BST forum. Before doing so, he had previously contacted the eBay seller about a reduced price. But the seller had blocked him, so although the seller replied, the reply didn’t get to the buyer (who is no longer trying to get a discount). Whew!😄
.
Correct -- except that I haven't seen a retraction for his requested 50% discount.
Maybe I missed it. So I just now (again) reviewed his posts above and don't see a retraction.
I also haven't received anything from ebay that a partial refund is no longer an option.
So for now, as far as I know, his request for $100 partial refund is still active.
Since he’s paid for the coin and now has it listed, I don’t see why there would be any reason to retract the request for a discount. It’s a moot point.
.
I agree, it's moot -- especially since I'd never agree to it. But I still see it every time I review my messages.
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
@numisma said:
I am confused. Is the eBay buyer now selling the same coin on the BST while trying to get a partial refund? I am missing something here.
As I understand it, the eBay buyer has posted the coin on the BST forum. Before doing so, he had previously contacted the eBay seller about a reduced price. But the seller had blocked him, so although the seller replied, the reply didn’t get to the buyer (who is no longer trying to get a discount). Whew!😄
.
Correct -- except that I haven't seen a retraction for his requested 50% discount.
Maybe I missed it. So I just now (again) reviewed his posts above and don't see a retraction.
I also haven't received anything from ebay that a partial refund is no longer an option.
So for now, as far as I know, his request for $100 partial refund is still active.
Since he’s paid for the coin and now has it listed, I don’t see why there would be any reason to retract the request for a discount. It’s a moot point.
.
I agree, it's moot -- especially since I'd never agree to it. But I still see it every time I review my messages.
Seriously, if it bothers you even a little bit - and I can understand if it does - why not delete the message?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Aside from everything else, here are a few takeaways for me:
The buyer asked for a refund that would have placed the purchase price atleast $30 below issue price.
After criticizing the seller for not mentioning what the buyer incorrectly calls "damage", he turns around and lists it on the BST with no mention of the so-called "damage". The subsequent claim that he would have disclosed it had anyone expressed an interest seems a little ridiculous.
The buyer has been given the chance to recover all of his money by not one but two different people. He should take the offer, retract his negative feedback, and everyone can move on.
This might not be the perfect place for this, but I'm going to say it anyway...
If you're a buyer on eBay, it would be beneficial to recognize that eBay sellers are well aware that in just about any conflict, eBay considers them to be the bad guy. If you have an issue with the item you bought, approach it with this understanding and you will increase the odds of a satisfactory resolution of your problem.
This looks like it's been a confusing situation. I see a buyer, buying a coin that he realized was not the coin he wanted to purchase in the first place. Then he inspects the coin for any flaw he can in order to ask for half of his money back. Then puts that same coin on the bst to try to get another coin that he wants without listing the flaws that he found to try to justify getting a $100 refund from is mistaken purchase. Sounds like buyers remorse to me.
Look - this is gotten a little over the top so one last post in this topic. The irony to the whole thing is I’m being accused of the intention to sell this item with an undisclosed defect - however as we now know from above that is exactly what the seller did to me! And really did it! He admitted he knew about it all along - even took a photo which the OP posted above and sold it to me without disclosing it and had a no return policy. Something I’m being accused of intending to do!! It’s no longer for sale but if d Carr wants it I’m okay with that and I’ll pm him.
As I mentioned twice now, my note to seller was not done in good taste, I’ve admitted that, and I apologized. All the seller had to do was say “I’m sorry you’re disappointed and actually I’m aware of the defect but it is not damage just a defect - I don’t think justify that size of compensation” or something like that and we would have worked it out - I only proposed a refund but it wasn’t written well. But instead he doesn’t respond - says he blocked me but then wrote me - I guess not wanting any response (which makes no sense if you think about it) and instead brings it here to try and shame the buyer. There’s nothing more I can do here. I will likely stop visiting here for while because I’m obviously upset and yes I feel shamed and did not mean for all of this. I have bought and sold on eBay with good reviews and I try to treat people with respect. I do regret my letter to the seller but I took a chance on a listing with no refund and was aggravated when I opened and saw two big dings and scratch on the bottom. It’s all good. And by the way I did not actually give a neg review I gave it neutral!!
And what else - oh yeah, ANACS does grade d Carr coins to the poster that said they don’t. If you read there is something about “damaged” coins with a no-grade - didn’t know at the time it was a defect. And finally, no I did not see this thread before I posted. There are tons to read so being logged on doesn’t mean you read every thread! I really didn’t see it, wish I had - maybe could have stopped the bleeding sooner.
Everyone enjoy the hobby and very best regards.
@numisma said:
I am confused. Is the eBay buyer now selling the same coin on the BST while trying to get a partial refund? I am missing something here.
As I understand it, the eBay buyer has posted the coin on the BST forum. Before doing so, he had previously contacted the eBay seller about a reduced price. But the seller had blocked him, so although the seller replied, the reply didn’t get to the buyer (who is no longer trying to get a discount). Whew!😄
.
Correct -- except that I haven't seen a retraction for his requested 50% discount.
Maybe I missed it. So I just now (again) reviewed his posts above and don't see a retraction.
I also haven't received anything from ebay that a partial refund is no longer an option.
So for now, as far as I know, his request for $100 partial refund is still active.
Since he’s paid for the coin and now has it listed, I don’t see why there would be any reason to retract the request for a discount. It’s a moot point.
.
I agree, it's moot -- especially since I'd never agree to it. But I still see it every time I review my messages.
Comments
@Che_Grapes Did you not see where Dan Carr posted and said it's not damage?
FYI
I did - thank you.
Just admit you bought the wrong item and then looked for any reason to return or get a partial refund.
I will say it again you should revise your feedback on ebay you are very much in the wrong with this transaction.
Well because that is simply not the truth. When I wrote the seller I didn’t know at that time I had the wrong one, just that it was damaged. I had just opened it and saw it immediately.
If the seller had disclosed it on the eBay listing (he admits in thread above he knew about it!!) then maybe this would not have happened. But either way, I should have handled it better but it was still sold to me undisclosed with damage and I got no reply when I inquired and offered some opportunity to make things whole. My review is the truth!
It is not damaged. You keep using that word even though it does not apply.
While clearly, Che_Grapes could and should have handled the situation much better, I don’t think he’s the terrible villain that some seem to believe he is.
I’m the one who notified him of this thread, as I had a feeling that he was unaware of it. And he’s now faced the angry crowd and handled himself much better than many others in his shoes would have.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Che_Grapes "it was still sold to me undisclosed with damage"
It was not undisclosed damage... read what Dan wrote!
"I should have and could handled it better on my side."
Every post you make you are digging the hole deeper...... apologize and revise your feedback.
I don't think he's a terrible villain. I also don't think he's helping himself any by continuing to claim the medal was damaged.
"but actually because I purchased the wrong one"
So you looked at the ebay listing and didn't notice you were bidding on the wrong item/year.
Then you have it in hand and don't notice you have the wrong year but you notice a small defect.
Ebay sellers can't look at an auction listing for you, please be responsible with your actions & bids.
Blocked
Yes I do understand, it may not be ‘post-mint’ damage but the actions i am referring to above occurred at a time when I believed it was damaged. So I’m referring to actions that occurred before I knew that. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
"Damage" implies that something happened to it AFTER it was struck. "Defect" implies that it is still as it was made, with a manufacturing flaw. So, technically, the piece in question is a "defect", not "damage".
And I don't think it is unreasonable for @Che_Grapes to have expected the DEFECT to have been noted.
It is also reasonable for him to have expected a response. Even if negative, to his request for mitigation.
This is an unfortunate transaction with errors on both sides.
I have an idea on how to make this thing whole thing go away (including the defect).
If Che_Grapes will retract the negative feedback, I will purchase the piece for $200.
Then I will take some smaller dies and over-strike it in the area of the defect to obliterate the defect.
Then I will auction the over-struck piece on eBay. Everybody wins.
PM me if interested.
Class act!
Is the item in question one that is described as or guaranteed to be flawless as struck? Issues such as this one could be avoided if those expecting perfection were to get a positive confirmation of their assumption from the seller before making their purchase.
Just a thought.
With the timeline in mind:
-- The buyer received the item March 14th.
-- The buyer posted this feedback March 17th:
The item was nice except it had some minor damage which I photographed and sent full description and clear photos to the seller with a letter asking for some way to resolve it with maybe a partial refund or some explanation, since I paid full retail price (and then some) for the item - I received neither, seller never wrote me back after 5 business days so I’m forced to write this review - first negative one I’ve ever written!! Won’t purchase here again.
1917-2017 Dan Carr WWI Centennial Commemorative 50mm 2oz 999 Silver HIGH RELIEF
-- My reply to the above feedback was posted March 19th:
This buyer's message to me stated: "Prior to posting any review I just wanted to see if this is something we can first resolve. Would you be willing to refund 100 dollars?" I reported this to ebay as a violation of the Feedback Extortion Policy. Pending ebay's review, I am not messaging the buyer directly. Also, the small imperfections photographed by the buyer are not damage. They are a result of the minting process. Buyer claims this item would get a "details no-grade", which is not true.
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
It would be nice if the buyer revised his feedback, yet really- it doesn't matter as eBay will do so for the seller once the facts are cited in a complaint with them.
I also concur the buyer shouldn't be vilified, perhaps only scolded a bit for his lack of self-awareness.
peacockcoins
.
Thanks Dan. Maybe that'll finally settle this mess.
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
@dcarr said:
I have an idea on how to make this thing whole thing go away (including the defect).
If Che_Grapes will retract the negative feedback, I will purchase the piece for $200.
Then I will take some smaller dies and over-strike it in the area of the defect to obliterate the defect.
Then I will auction the over-struck piece on eBay. Everybody wins.
PM me if interested.
I agree. And I want to show that classy post again, so am copying it here, in addition to having clicked “agree”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
If you get that settled I will buy that from you Dan just contact me after your done doing your fix, name your price and call it a done deal. I already own 2 of your 1917 pieces what’s another one, might as well make it 3! Let me know if you want it to come this way my offer stands however long it takes.
A key point some folks may have overlooked:
The largest size item ANACS certifies is 41mm:
https://anacs.com/SubmitFAQ.aspx#subq7
That's because larger items won't fit in their holder.
For example, the 2 oz Token purchased by the buyer is 50mm. If submitted to ANACS for grading, it would NOT be certified or graded simply because it's too big.
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
Since they are now communicating, the seller could also have accommodated a return.
Or Dan Carr can do his thing.
There is no wholly right or wholly wrong party here.
When an issue like this arrives, I tend to take sides. I look for character.
The buyer calls the piece a 'hard luck' piece in the BST. Says he didn't read the eBay listing close enough and bought in error. Says it will 'detail' grade even though no TPG will even take it as a submission. Attempts to rationalize his Attempts at eBay feedback extortion by demanding a 50% refund due to pmd when the item had no such damage.
Furthermore, has over 115 posts over the last 30 days and averages posts 6/7 days, some days with over 10 posts a day. With the exception of this thread and his BST offering which has not been responded to in three days. 'because he doesn't come on the forum all the time'. Although the threads are about him and his actions.
I'm sensing a pattern and I'm not even a detective.
He didn’t “demand “ a 50% refund or for that matter, anything.
And he responded here after I alerted him to the thread. At the time I did so, I think he’d been signed out for more than two days.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
From a complaining customer who bought a fairly-priced $200 item from me on ebay:
"Prior to posting any review I just wanted to see if this is something we can first resolve. Would you be willing to refund $100?"
Since I don't sell much on ebay, I'm wondering if anyone else receives that kind of message
Looks like 50% to me pal.
Field,
How would HA deal with this?
Feld
peacockcoins
Furthermore Field,
I stand by my calcs on his freq of posting. You have the same info available to you. I don't believe in coincidence. He's here almost everyday until this episode comes up. You can believe anything you want. I don't see you offering him $200.
I had posted “ He didn’t “demand “ a 50% refund or for that matter, anything.
And he responded here after I alerted him to the thread. At the time I did so, I think he’d been signed out for more than two days.”
My math is fine, thank you. And you somehow omitted the “demand...” part.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld "I think he’d been signed out for more than two days."
He signed in yesterday at aprox. 3:30 PM MST and would have seen notifications from his BST thread or the tags in this one.
He posted the BST thread on the 16th and I messaged him yesterday morning, the 19th.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I am confused. Is the eBay buyer now selling the same coin on the BST while trying to get a partial refund? I am missing something here.
As I understand it, the eBay buyer has posted the coin on the BST forum. Before doing so, he had previously contacted the eBay seller about a reduced price. But the seller had blocked him, so although the seller replied, the reply didn’t get to the buyer (who is no longer trying to get a discount). Whew!😄
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You're right about not demanding anything. But then, in the feedback he left, he wrote "so I’m forced to write this review - first negative one I’ve ever written!!" To be fair, eBay does not force anybody to write reviews. If it wasn't for the buyer's assumption of "no striking flaws" in the manufacture of the token, this thread never happens.
So you know where I'm coming from, I'm reading this thread as an eBay seller who has received negative feedback from buyers who have made assumptions about what they were buying, that were never claimed by me to be so.
One other issue that bugs me is when people who want to be able to return an item that's not acceptable upon inspection buy from a seller who doesn't offer to accept returns and then insist on wanting to return the item nonetheless. The seller described the condition thusly:
Excellent condition! No hazing & no spotting.
Is that inaccurate? I don't think so.
I disagree...
with nothing you posted, 😉I rarely do.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I blame eBay for these sort of situations. They've tipped the field so far in favor of buyers that it makes most anyone trying to sell almost immediately suspicious of just about anything out of the ordinary.
I hope there are enough qualifiers in there, but if not let me know and I'll add a few more.
.
Correct -- except that I haven't seen a retraction for his requested 50% discount.
Maybe I missed it. So I just now (again) reviewed his posts above and don't see a retraction.
I also haven't received anything from ebay that a partial refund is no longer an option.
So for now, as far as I know, his request for $100 partial refund is still active.
And his BST ad is unchanged: https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1072779/want-to-trade-dan-carr-hard-luck-for-1970-peace-over-strike#pagetop
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
If you've already blocked the buyer on eBay you might consider unblocking him until this issue is resolved in order that neither of you miss out on any messages sent.
Since he’s paid for the coin and now has it listed, I don’t see why there would be any reason to retract the request for a discount. It’s a moot point.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
.
Actually, I unblocked the buyer yesterday so that I could reply to his negative ebay feedback (my previous attempts to reply had failed).
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
As a matter of fact, I have another suggested qualifier. Instead of “…I’ll add a few more”, how about “I might add a few more”? 😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I might. Or not. So you're right.
.
I agree, it's moot -- especially since I'd never agree to it. But I still see it every time I review my messages.
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
Seriously, if it bothers you even a little bit - and I can understand if it does - why not delete the message?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Aside from everything else, here are a few takeaways for me:
The buyer asked for a refund that would have placed the purchase price atleast $30 below issue price.
After criticizing the seller for not mentioning what the buyer incorrectly calls "damage", he turns around and lists it on the BST with no mention of the so-called "damage". The subsequent claim that he would have disclosed it had anyone expressed an interest seems a little ridiculous.
The buyer has been given the chance to recover all of his money by not one but two different people. He should take the offer, retract his negative feedback, and everyone can move on.
This might not be the perfect place for this, but I'm going to say it anyway...
If you're a buyer on eBay, it would be beneficial to recognize that eBay sellers are well aware that in just about any conflict, eBay considers them to be the bad guy. If you have an issue with the item you bought, approach it with this understanding and you will increase the odds of a satisfactory resolution of your problem.
This looks like it's been a confusing situation. I see a buyer, buying a coin that he realized was not the coin he wanted to purchase in the first place. Then he inspects the coin for any flaw he can in order to ask for half of his money back. Then puts that same coin on the bst to try to get another coin that he wants without listing the flaws that he found to try to justify getting a $100 refund from is mistaken purchase. Sounds like buyers remorse to me.
My Original Song Written to my late wife-"Plus other original music by me"
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8A11CC8CC6093D80
https://n1m.com/bobbysmith1
Look - this is gotten a little over the top so one last post in this topic. The irony to the whole thing is I’m being accused of the intention to sell this item with an undisclosed defect - however as we now know from above that is exactly what the seller did to me! And really did it! He admitted he knew about it all along - even took a photo which the OP posted above and sold it to me without disclosing it and had a no return policy. Something I’m being accused of intending to do!! It’s no longer for sale but if d Carr wants it I’m okay with that and I’ll pm him.
As I mentioned twice now, my note to seller was not done in good taste, I’ve admitted that, and I apologized. All the seller had to do was say “I’m sorry you’re disappointed and actually I’m aware of the defect but it is not damage just a defect - I don’t think justify that size of compensation” or something like that and we would have worked it out - I only proposed a refund but it wasn’t written well. But instead he doesn’t respond - says he blocked me but then wrote me - I guess not wanting any response (which makes no sense if you think about it) and instead brings it here to try and shame the buyer. There’s nothing more I can do here. I will likely stop visiting here for while because I’m obviously upset and yes I feel shamed and did not mean for all of this. I have bought and sold on eBay with good reviews and I try to treat people with respect. I do regret my letter to the seller but I took a chance on a listing with no refund and was aggravated when I opened and saw two big dings and scratch on the bottom. It’s all good. And by the way I did not actually give a neg review I gave it neutral!!
And what else - oh yeah, ANACS does grade d Carr coins to the poster that said they don’t. If you read there is something about “damaged” coins with a no-grade - didn’t know at the time it was a defect. And finally, no I did not see this thread before I posted. There are tons to read so being logged on doesn’t mean you read every thread! I really didn’t see it, wish I had - maybe could have stopped the bleeding sooner.
Everyone enjoy the hobby and very best regards.
You could agree to a return (buyer pays postage).