[gpalmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by radrd However, I agree that Orpheus is not in any way at fault and should receive what he paid for or his money back. It is the seller's responsibility to insure what he is shipping is built well enough for shipment. The seller should have bought enough insurance and immediately refunded Orpheus's money while he dealt with the shipping company.

This should be 100% the shippers responsibility. I would leave negative feedback for him. It's wonderful of eric to fix it, at least it takes away a little of the sting.

 

[jpelg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edwood BTW, Both Steve and Bill originally ripped off IBM.

Wasn't it Xerox they both ripped off for the GUI/mouse interface?

 

[ampgalore]

So did insurance finally pay for the damage?

 

[taoster]

i don't know if the burden should fall 100% on the seller. From what was said, it was well packed but broken internally, which he most likely had no idea it would at the time, hence it was cared for and well packed. My concern is, the buyer wanted money back instead of a fix solution only, had he actually wanted to keep the amp the problem would had been resolved(although it's his prerogative to keep or sell the amp in question).

 

[Orpheus]

Quote:

So did insurance finally pay for the damage?

i dunno. maybe it did. but if it did, i ain't seeing any of the money. the seller's ignoring me.
Quote:

My concern is, the buyer wanted money back instead of a fix solution only, had he actually wanted to keep the amp the problem would had been resolved(although it's his prerogative to keep or sell the amp in question).

but that really isn't a factor. what i want to do with the amp has nothing to do with the transaction between me and him. it was not a term for any agreement or anything.
Quote:

From what was said, it was well packed but broken internally, which he most likely had no idea it would at the time, hence it was cared for and well packed.

look at it this way: you've returned things before that broke right?--returned under warrantee? the manufacturer probably didn't intend for it to break of course. (now, we all know some companies know their products are faulty, but for simplicity's sake you can agree with me, in general.) and yet, they still have to honor their warrantee. it's like that--the seller/manufacturer doesn't need to know explicitly that the product will break to be responsible for internal damage.

and the seller is responsible by the way--i could have had my money refunded under Paypal terms. but i didn't. but they would have sided with me, i think quite obviously. i did not contact Paypal cause i was stupid--i didn't think any head-fi'er would rip me off.

 

[Dweebgal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by taoster i don't know if the burden should fall 100% on the seller. From what was said, it was well packed but broken internally, which he most likely had no idea it would at the time, hence it was cared for and well packed. My concern is, the buyer wanted money back instead of a fix solution only, had he actually wanted to keep the amp the problem would had been resolved(although it's his prerogative to keep or sell the amp in question).

just my 0.02.

i used to work for royal mail here in the uk on the customer services side, and part of my job was to inspect the packaging on (expensive, for cheap stuff we just took whatever they said at face value, much less hassle), and items, that had been damaged in the post.

i found from my experience, if something was packaged well, but was damaged inside, it was probably like that before it was sent. also, say if something had suffered a fall, there would be damage to the outside of the packaging that corresponded with damage on the outside of the item.

however, this thread brings up an interesting thought, maybe there should be some "official" trading/selling guidelines. just to make official the ettiquette that already seems to be largely present

 

[eric343]

Did the seller offer or include an explicit warranty or guarantee?

 

[Genetic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eric343 Did the seller offer or include an explicit warranty or guarantee?

It will be difficult to answer this knowing that different countries may have different rules about this. But the general principle is that the seller is sending an amp in working condition (an implicit warranty that could reach a reasonable lenght in time). The ownership is transfered at the exact moment where the deal is accepted by the seller. But if the item is «fragile» he has the obligation to send it with the proper way to insure that the amp will reach the new owner in the same working condition.

Amicalement

 

[ampgalore]

So what has happened to the amp? Got it fixed? Sold it?

It's always difficult to deal with private sellers. Private sellers are not huge corporations that can take losses like this.

 

[taoster]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orpheus look at it this way: you've returned things before that broke right?--returned under warrantee? the manufacturer probably didn't intend for it to break of course.

I do agree with you and do think you deserve your money back. Just that I also think the fault is anybody's fault and the case isn't so black and white. I had in the past made a purchase on head-fi for a modded product, the product did not work as it should on my gear(and most probably 95% of other gears too), but worked on the seller's gear. Had it been from a shop I would of asked for my money back but a private seller is different. I ended modding the product myself to get it to work, with out compensation. Was it fair? maybe, maybe not, but IMHO it's not such a black and white case.

 

[Orpheus]

Quote:

Did the seller offer or include an explicit warranty or guarantee?

well, no. but i paid for the item that was listed and pictured. what i received was not what i paid for.
Quote:

So what has happened to the amp? Got it fixed? Sold it?

well, eric's gonna fix it up for me. (thanks eric.) ...but it's gonna be a while. he has finals now. and plus there's shipping back and forth. heck i've had this amp for 5 months now, it can wait another.

Quote:

It's always difficult to deal with private sellers. Private sellers are not huge corporations that can take losses like this.

yup, crap happens. but again, if i were him, i'd put it on my credit card and pay the debt myself. it's my honor.
Quote:

Just that I also think the fault is anybody's fault and the case isn't so black and white.

agree the "fault" is not black and white (though definately it ain't my fault at all.) i never even told him to his face that he was at fault. what i said was that it's his "responsibility." he carries the full burden to refund me, or insure my satisfaction. how he gets the money really isn't my issue. he did insure it though, and for all i know, he already got the money and just didn't tell me. again, i already sent him all relevant documentation. if this is anything like Canada Post (the example i used earlier), he already got my money.

 

[taoster]

best of luck and thank eric for the fix :-D

you should put a negative feedback on him. The non-communication is a big no, no in anyone's book.

 

[Earwax]

Is the seller still actively posting on head-fi? Does he know about this thread?

If he is still here you should definately post the name in a feedback thread so we all know not to deal with someone who'd just drop communication before an issue is resolved. I also think the seller should have a chance to tell his side of the story, but if it's all as you say, maybe he'd see this thread and seeing all the responses supporting you, he'll decide to at least foot the bill for repairs.

 

[Orpheus]

yeah i will post a complaint in feedback soon. i'm at work now, and i got loads of stuff to do.

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpelg Wasn't it Xerox they both ripped off for the GUI/mouse interface?

Yes, you're right. They ripped off both Xerox and IBM. Mostly, Xerox.

-Ed