Poll About my messed up trade with PAC Please check it out. THANKS
vittleboy
Posts: 2,975
This has gone on and on. I only want my stuff back. He Wanted to Rip me off and if this does not get fixed i will post him as a bad trader on here EVERYDAY and i will TTT it 10. Like I said i hope he has fun sending first the rest of his time here.
0
Comments
“PSA lists the cards by the first year on them.
Example: the first Fleer set (1986-87) has its cards listed as 1986 Fleer on the holder. If someone advertises a 1987 Fleer, they're probably talking about the 1987-88 Fleer.
1986 Jordan PSA 10
Many other individuals and companies selling or trading cards also list the card by the first year of the season in which the set came out.
If pacmans is consistently listing his cards by the first year on split-year cards, he is within common hobby practice. There is no consensus to list the Kobe/KG card as an '02.
Why did vittle assume that pacmans meant the second year rather than the first year? If the year is that important, why didn't he ask for a scan or ask whether the card was a '00-'01 or a '01-'02?
I think vittle is in the wrong. He made a deal based on a listing that, while not perfect, was within common practice, and he never asked for clarifying information.
BTW, threatening someone with unjustified criminal charges in order to obtain an advantage in a private deal is illegal, and in some states itself criminal.
I think you should have to bear the burden of your mistaken assumption. He made a reasonable listing (the same way PSA would list the card on a holder) and you never asked for clarification. “
Nick
Glenn Robinson Auto Collection 7/21
<< <i>If pacmans is consistently listing his cards by the first year on split-year cards, he is within common hobby practice. >>
This is, irrelevant and wrong. The hobby standard is to list hockey and basketball with two years. Even if Nick is correct with his definition of a hobby standard, the standard also exists exactly opposite to his statement.
The issue here is what happens when a mistake occurs between 2 nonmerchants. We will assume for the point of argument that pacmans was not intentionally listing his card with one year so others would be mistaken, as this would be fraud and the end of the discussion.
<< <i>I think vittle is in the wrong. He made a deal based on a listing that, while not perfect, was within common practice, and he never asked for clarifying information. >>
Here is the crux of the problem, and even the one supporter of pacmans realizes the problem. The listing of a single year on a basketball card is not perfect--it is actually a mistake and in and of itself misleading. Does Beckett list this item with a single year? Obviously no.
The duty is not with Vittleboy to inquire. Caveat emptor sounds great, but has so little practicality to be meaningless. The duty is actually on pacmans to describe his item with clarity. Vittleboy was mistaken as to what card he was trading for, which was a mistake caused by the lack of clarity in pacmans' listing. It was reasonably foreseeable that this mistake would happen. As such, Vittleboy has the right to rescind the deal and each party is to return the consideration.
Another thing to take from this, is most traders do not consider a deal done until both parties receive and are happy with what they receive. What pacmans has demonstrated is he considers a deal completed when agreed to. He is a poor trader who will not return items when he causes a mistake. He should be avoided at all costs, unless you feel like rolling the dice.
Chuck
my Trade/Want list
Glenn Robinson Auto Collection 7/21
Pac...Just give him his stuff back
Vittle Send him his stuff back....
Pac and Vittle...Never trade again....
that will be $245.00....my secretary will bill you both...have a good day....
<<<< If pacmans is consistently listing his cards by the first year on split-year cards, he is within common hobby practice. >>>>
<<This is, irrelevant and wrong. The hobby standard is to list hockey and basketball with two years. Even if Nick is correct with his definition of a hobby standard, the standard also exists exactly opposite to his statement.>>
You are wrong on one count and irrelevant on the other. PSA lists basketball and hockey cards by listing one year. PSA's expertise and acceptance in the field is such that their practice can establish a hobby standard. It is also wide practice on eBay to list only the first year on basketball and hockey cards.
I have pointedly not said that the only standard is to list as pacman had. Two-year listings are irrelevant here. The question presented is what a one-year listing on a basketball or hockey card means.
I challenge you to find any standard established that a listing of one year on a split-year card refers to the second year of the split. The fact that you list some of your cards by their second year on your website does not establish a standard.
<<The issue here is what happens when a mistake occurs between 2 nonmerchants. We will assume for the point of argument that pacmans was not intentionally listing his card with one year so others would be mistaken, as this would be fraud and the end of the discussion.>>
If they both regularly trade sports cards, they qualify as merchants of sports cards under the Commercial Code of every state in the country. You simply do not know what you are talking about.
You further manage to smear pacman by implication, without having any evidence that he intended to cheat anyone. I can just as easily assume for the sake of argument that vittleboy did not think at the time of making the deal that a '00-'01 and a '01-'02 of the card booked the same and therefore not care which it was.
<<<< I think vittle is in the wrong. He made a deal based on a listing that, while not perfect, was within common practice, and he never asked for clarifying information. >>>>
<<Here is the crux of the problem, and even the one supporter of pacmans realizes the problem. The listing of a single year on a basketball card is not perfect--it is actually a mistake and in and of itself misleading. Does Beckett list this item with a single year? Obviously no.>>
Does PSA? Obviously yes. Are you saying that every PSA graded basketball card has a mistaken and misleading listing? I note also that your reference to me as the "one supporter" is so blatantly false as to be likely a wilful attempt to deceive others who may not read the whole thread.
<<The duty is not with Vittleboy to inquire. Caveat emptor sounds great, but has so little practicality to be meaningless. The duty is actually on pacmans to describe his item with clarity. Vittleboy was mistaken as to what card he was trading for, which was a mistake caused by the lack of clarity in pacmans' listing. It was reasonably foreseeable that this mistake would happen. As such, Vittleboy has the right to rescind the deal and each party is to return the consideration.>>
First, since they are both merchants under commercial law, no common law discussion matters. Second, caveat emptor is not meaningless in law. Third, pacman listed the card using a widely used form (just the first year of the split), which means that his form is considered acceptable in the field. Vittleboy had no reasonable ground to be certain that 01 meant 2000-01. His belief goes against general practices in the field. If he was certain, he made an unreasonable assumption, and even if he were not a merchant, a party making an unreasonable assumption is not entitled to rescind when the assumption turns out to be wrong. If he was not certain, then he made no mistake. He simply chose to take a risk that could have been eliminated by asking a question. Your assertion that vittleboy's mistake was reasonably foreseeable is answering the wrong question - the common law question was whether a mistake was reasonable to make.
Furthermore, vittleboy himself uses the first year on split year cards in his listings for trade. This example is taken straight from his tradelist on his webpage (site in his sig file):
1996 Finest Kobe Bryant Rc
There are many more such examples, but Kobe is the most easily recognizable as to year.
I find vittleboy's claim that he thought pacman meant the opposite of what vittleboy himself means when he uses the same designation to be highly unpersuasive and rather contrived.
<<Another thing to take from this, is most traders do not consider a deal done until both parties receive and are happy with what they receive. What pacmans has demonstrated is he considers a deal completed when agreed to. He is a poor trader who will not return items when he causes a mistake. He should be avoided at all costs, unless you feel like rolling the dice.>>
Chuck
Most traders I know consider a deal done when both parties receive their cards. They know better than to rely on the standard of someone else's "happiness", as far too many traders, especially on a board populated with a lot of teenagers, will abuse return privileges. Pacman has clearly not indicated what you claim he did (i.e., the deal is done when agreed to).
Vittleboy's mistake was caused by his own unreasonable assumptions (likely mixed with greed). He claims to have thought that someone else was trading him essentially $300 for $180. Since he initiated the choice of cards to receive in trade (the "01" card was posted on pacman's website), there is all the more reason to hold him to what he did.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.