A Sale Gone Wrong ??

[Yousuf Abbasi]

Just to clarify my initial post: The buyer did pay for the item upfront, but the issue is now he is asking for a refund after the item supposedly doesn't work over a month later, even after his initial evaluation was that it was excellent.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

If he received the item and confirmed it was in good condition, there's really nothing else you can (or should) offer him. A month later and he suddenly claims it's damaged or there is a problem contradictory to his last approval of the item just seems off. There could be a lot of things that happened in that 30 days, of which you would have no knowledge of. I'm afraid it's his problem now, that's the stand I would take.

This very situation has happened to me more than once. I sell a perfectly good item, buyer verifies that it is in proper order once received... Then at some point later on, they have issues and want their money back... Well, I'm not Wal-Mart, this is not a new item, blah, blah, whatever.

In 20/20 hindsight, you should always state in your sales terms that items are sold as-is and/or once the buyer receives the item in proper working order and confirms this, the deal is then closed. At this point you are not obligated to do anything. He bought it from you and verified it was in good order. There's no way he can prove that it wasn't misused or damaged in the mean time. If the mic is still under warranty, he should pursue that course of action. If not, then he's probably SOL.

 

[Andy White]

*Edit - Jeff beat me to it... with a similar take on the situation

If it was paid for & accepted as working/functional by the buyer & has been used (and subsequently developed a problem), it's an interesting point.

You're a private seller and the goods are second hand - so it's not like buying from a dealer/shop and having a warranty for 12 months to take something back or get it repaired. I purchased an old lens a few years ago that initially was fine, worked on a handful of shoots OK and then the aperture ring stuck... maybe either myself, AC or wandering rogue gremlin was too rough with it (doubtful) - or maybe it was on the way out & needed a service anyway (probably)... I didn't demand a refund (etc) just took it for a repair/service.

So, if it's been used (even once) when it's out of your hands, I don't see how a full refund could be demanded. Just my thoughts.

Hope you sort this out.

 

[Erik Franzén]

Unless you knew about any obvious flaws and intentionally decided to not mention them, then he's got no case. If he approved of the item, he's got even less of a case. You aren't liable for the item any longer so it's his problem at this point.

 

[Tyler Quinn]

I'm going to revive this comment thread if I may since I am going through a similar situation right now and ask for some advice. This is interesting because I am the Buyer in this case and not the Seller as most of you who have commented here are. Let me go straight into my story first:

I responded to an ad here posted by a user selling a RED One package. After a few emails I decided that I would put down a deposit to guarantee my spot in front of another buyer. I was in Phoenix at the time and the seller was showing the camera in Los Angeles. Because I was unable to be there personally, I had a friend meet the Seller and witness a demonstration of the camera. I have cell phone footage of the camera on and functioning for a few seconds. I sent a wire transfer for the full amount, and my friend left with the camera. The camera sat in its Pelican case at my friends house for a week or two before I had a client drive the case to Phoenix for me. The camera sat in my office for the next week while I got around to setting up and testing the camera. Over the course of the week, I successfully booted the camera up about 1 out of 5 times. When it did boot up, it froze repeatedly while recording. I didn't know what the exact problem was, so I drove the camera myself to RED in Hollywood as soon as I had the chance to have it evaluated. RED informed me after a week or so that the camera would not boot up and the fix would cost me $4200, which is about half the market value of this camera.

The Seller claims that it is not his responsibility because of the amount of time that had passed after the sale date, which was about two months.

So from where I'm standing, I spent $10k on a used RED ONE package for a camera that is currently inoperable. I spent another $600 (for transfer of ownership and evaluation) to have RED agree that yes, I now own an inoperable camera. An additional $4200, which is more than half the market value of the camera, is required to get it working. If I paid for this service I would be spending $15k for a used RED One package.

I am completely immobile with my cash tied up in this camera and I'm turning down jobs right now. The Seller is not responding to email and his phone is disconnected.

Thanks for any advice.

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

tyler..
in your case.. this is not the sellers fault..
unfortunately, you accepted on behalf of your friend who witnessed a working camera..

the course of action should have been to bring it into red for inspection (on your dime of course) and once red gave it the go ahead, make the purchase.

it sucks, but with used gear its a gamble.

 

[Brian F Kobylarz]

Tyler,

First spot of advice is a lesson - for you, for anyone:

Work with RED when you purchase a used camera - before completing the sale. They will fully test the camera - and as you now know, transfer the ownership in their system. That $600 charge is well worth it - it protects all parties. Who pays for it is subject to negotiation - I would always suggest a split. A deposit during the checkout time is appropriate.
If the seller hesitates having RED check it out - it may be because they have detected glitches - or worse, it could be stolen.

 

[Mike 'Fireman' Ross]

...or worse, it could be stolen.

Yes it could. But RED may well have no idea whether or not it's stolen - and RED can be very misleading about that. I urge all to refer to a reply I gave some time ago:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...age-for-sale&p=1112938&viewfull=1#post1112938

Mike

 

[Vince Sweeney]

And I thought I had issues with BrainBox cameras for stealing our $100 deposit for not buying their piece of crap, misrepresented F3 that we needed for a doc. project but this is a much rougher situation to say the least. In the used car world it is always "as is where is". In the more specialty/exotic used car markets that I'm familiar with it's the same but many people sort of have this expectation of better or more forgiving sellers, but it rarely exists. The camera market is very similar; closer, smaller groups of people with common interests but when it comes to money, they act like it's any other market. The reason is the stress of owning something expensive and specialized is relieved when that item is sold and no one wants to reintroduce that into their lives and rarely ever will.

Paying someone to inspect something too far away is an important consideration, not that it's very helpful to you now. This lesson will help protect you in the future though. I was lucky to be able to inspect and reject that POS Sony today because of prior lessons I paid a lot for.

 

[Tyler Quinn]

Work with RED when you purchase a used camera - before completing the sale.

This was my first RED purchase. Your suggestion here sounds like the best way to go about a deal like this. HOWever, in the first email RED sent me they stated:
"Both parties are REQUIRED to arrange their payment details before beginning the transfer process." This is also what the Seller conveyed to me.

Another interesting development is that in his ad description the Seller noted the camera had a major part replaced worth at least $7000 less than a year ago. A representative at RED mentioned there had been no service done to this camera in a over a year and a half. So... are these cameras serviceable by third parties?

 

[Bob Gundu]

That just means you have agreed on the purchase price and you have worked out who will be paying for the transfer and inspection. Many would agree that a contract or agreement with the seller would entail having RED evaluate the camera. Upon a clean inspection, RED would ship the camera to the new owner. This protects all involved. Any seller not willing to do this is suspicious in my opinion.

This was my first RED purchase. Your suggestion here sounds like the best way to go about a deal like this. HOWever, in the first email RED sent me they stated:
"Both parties are REQUIRED to arrange their payment details before beginning the transfer process." This is also what the Seller conveyed to me.

Another interesting development is that in his ad description the Seller noted the camera had a major part replaced worth at least $7000 less than a year ago. A representative at RED mentioned there had been no service done to this camera in a over a year and a half. So... are these cameras serviceable by third parties?

 

[Brian F Kobylarz]

This was my first RED purchase. Your suggestion here sounds like the best way to go about a deal like this. HOWever, in the first email RED sent me they stated:
"Both parties are REQUIRED to arrange their payment details before beginning the transfer process." This is also what the Seller conveyed to me.?

Exactly what Bob said.
RED does not want to be caught between the two parties. i.e.: "He said he would pay for the inspection / transfer, now he's saying something different" or "It would cost too much to fix, now no one wants to pay RED for the inspection"
RED is in the business of designing and selling cameras, not acting as a referee.

Another interesting development is that in his ad description the Seller noted the camera had a major part replaced worth at least $7000 less than a year ago. A representative at RED mentioned there had been no service done to this camera in a over a year and a half. So... are these cameras serviceable by third parties?

OK, you may have something to work with here. Ask for proof from the seller. Ask RED to provide a service history. If they do not match up, consider small claims court.
If you can show mis-representation on the sellers part, the court might rule in your favor... Maybe.

 

[Tyler Quinn]

I totally understand the concept of RED not needing to be the middleman/referee between a used sale. but I am pretty unhappy with how convoluted the process was, and the fact that the seller was directing me to complete the sale before going through the transfer process.

Thanks for the comments everyone.

 

[Chris Hansen]

tyler..
in your case.. this is not the sellers fault..
unfortunately, you accepted on behalf of your friend who witnessed a working camera..

the course of action should have been to bring it into red for inspection (on your dime of course) and once red gave it the go ahead, make the purchase.

it sucks, but with used gear its a gamble.

I agree.
Plus you gave the seller an easy out because you took waaaaaaaaaay too long (about 2 months) to check it yourself.
Is it a no no to tell us who the seller was?

 

[Stefan Scherperel]

Going back to the original poster of his thread, one thing that I have always done when selling used equipment is document the crap out of it just before shipping.
-Grab a copy of the days newspaper and shoot the date and headline for date verification. Make sure to do this on the day you are shipping the item.
-Video is better than still photos. visually inspect the item from every angle, show every compartment, opening, door, moving piece, glass etc. of the item.
-Turn it on and show that it's working, with a microphone hook it up to something that shows the levels, make a recording and then playback that recording (save the recording as well). Show that the item is working in every function that it has. If it's a camera, show the image, record the image and save it for record.
-Show yourself packing up the item, show how it's packed, what you packed it in, and show yourself writing the address of the recipient.

You do not need to disclose all this documentation to the buyer, but have it on hand just in case. This should cover you in almost any situation that should arrive, whether the item was damaged in shipping, or the Buyer claims that the item is not as described, or for situations like yours. Sending all of that documentation over to a buyer after a complaint that your item is not working when you know that it was working when you sent it should quiet any buyer from the situation.

It sucks that it needs to come to this, but there are just too many people out there that are either just ass holes, careless people looking for someone else to take the blame, or just idiots. I've been burned once on a sale of used equipment, and I will never let it happen again.

For the record I would reccomend doing the same thing when purchasing used gear. The day that you recieve it, document the crap out of it. Show that it is either working or not working from the second you take it out of the package. Show how the equipment was packed by showing the opening of the package, etc.

It may be overkill, but when working with expensive gear, sometimes that is what's necesary.

And to Tyler:
My rule of thumb, is never buy anything used that you cannot check out immediately. If you know you wont be able to look at the camera for several months, do not buy the camera. By you not inspecting the camera immediatly, this whole case turns into a he says/ she says. Unfortunatly I would have to side on the seller of your camera. He may have knowingly sold you a bad camera (If he did that is really just a shit move) but by you not checking out the camera yourself and then waiting two months you have given him the upper hand in the situation as to who gets to keep the money and who gets stuck with a broken camera. I'm sorry you are going through this, it sucks and is more frastrating that anything, but hey, maybe that's why I'm such an overly safe buyer and seller today.

 

[Bob Gundu]

Good advice Stefan.

Going back to the original poster of his thread, one thing that I have always done when selling used equipment is document the crap out of it just before shipping.
-Grab a copy of the days newspaper and shoot the date and headline for date verification. Make sure to do this on the day you are shipping the item.
-Video is better than still photos. visually inspect the item from every angle, show every compartment, opening, door, moving piece, glass etc. of the item.
-Turn it on and show that it's working, with a microphone hook it up to something that shows the levels, make a recording and then playback that recording (save the recording as well). Show that the item is working in every function that it has. If it's a camera, show the image, record the image and save it for record.
-Show yourself packing up the item, show how it's packed, what you packed it in, and show yourself writing the address of the recipient.

You do not need to disclose all this documentation to the buyer, but have it on hand just in case. This should cover you in almost any situation that should arrive, whether the item was damaged in shipping, or the Buyer claims that the item is not as described, or for situations like yours. Sending all of that documentation over to a buyer after a complaint that your item is not working when you know that it was working when you sent it should quiet any buyer from the situation.

It sucks that it needs to come to this, but there are just too many people out there that are either just ass holes, careless people looking for someone else to take the blame, or just idiots. I've been burned once on a sale of used equipment, and I will never let it happen again.

For the record I would reccomend doing the same thing when purchasing used gear. The day that you recieve it, document the crap out of it. Show that it is either working or not working from the second you take it out of the package. Show how the equipment was packed by showing the opening of the package, etc.

It may be overkill, but when working with expensive gear, sometimes that is what's necesary.

And to Tyler:
My rule of thumb, is never buy anything used that you cannot check out immediately. If you know you wont be able to look at the camera for several months, do not buy the camera. By you not inspecting the camera immediatly, this whole case turns into a he says/ she says. Unfortunatly I would have to side on the seller of your camera. He may have knowingly sold you a bad camera (If he did that is really just a shit move) but by you not checking out the camera yourself and then waiting two months you have given him the upper hand in the situation as to who gets to keep the money and who gets stuck with a broken camera. I'm sorry you are going through this, it sucks and is more frastrating that anything, but hey, maybe that's why I'm such an overly safe buyer and seller today.

 

[Tyler Quinn]

I agree.
Plus you gave the seller an easy out because you took waaaaaaaaaay too long (about 2 months) to check it yourself.
Is it a no no to tell us who the seller was?

Chris, I wasn't able to test the camera myself until a couple weeks after purchasing, not Months. I wasn't able to get it in to RED for evaluation until after that. I'll stress that the seller was very articulate about having me buy the camera before sending it into RED to be inspected. I also have reason to believe he misrepresented the camera as having new parts when the camera was in fact never serviced. He has been completely silent the last three weeks as I've requested that he check in with RED to discuss the cameras service history.

 

[Chris Hansen]

Chris, I wasn't able to test the camera myself until a couple weeks after purchasing, not Months. I wasn't able to get it in to RED for evaluation until after that. I'll stress that the seller was very articulate about having me buy the camera before sending it into RED to be inspected. I also have reason to believe he misrepresented the camera as having new parts when the camera was in fact never serviced. He has been completely silent the last three weeks as I've requested that he check in with RED to discuss the cameras service history.

You might want to correct your previous post then:

The Seller claims that it is not his responsibility because of the amount of time that had passed after the sale date, which was about two months.

Either way it sounds like you delt with a sneaky dude.
I'm sure we would all like to know who it was only if it's allowed.
Not looking to get anyone in trouble here.