Bartertown.com

Well, Lin, I disagree with you.

The buyer's last statement shows, to me, that he was trying to renegotiate the deal. He found it at a better price after the deal was resolved. "Why should I pay you $25+ when I can get it elsewhere for $32 new?" If he had those facts earlier, he should've replied, "$25. I can get a new one elsewhere for $32."

The buyer knew he was being sent a shipping quote. The entire exchange of, I'll go to the post office and send you back a price with shipping, shows he was aware of that.

If he was only willing to pay $25, including the shipping, the shipping quote wouldn't have been needed. He should've said that his price was $25 including shipping when he sent his address, not 6 days later; 3 days after he was sent the total with shipping.

He made a deal on the 25th when he sent his address. He tried to renegotiate on the 31st, after he found one for a better price. Then on 2 hours later backed out.

MagickalMemories wrote:Whether you agree with my decision or not, it is NOT a place to discuss it, per Bartertown's rules.

If you're making a "decision" whether a backout has occurred, then one presumes that it must follow Bartertown rules for a valid backout. The rules for a valid backout report require that the both parties clearly agree (e.g. "sounds good"). The OP has NOT met that criteria, as he himself states "Let me know you adress and I will get him boxed up and give you a total cost incl. Shipping.". If the OP intended this to be the basis for an actual deal, he should have worded it like this:

Please confirm that you are agreeing to pay $25 PLUS actual shipping and handling charges by sending your mailing address to me. I will then box it up and provide the total to you.

In the above example, the sending of the mailing address is explicitly linked to agreement. In the actual case, the sending of the address is only linked to "a total cost incl. Shipping". From a contractual standpoint, once the OP provided the total price, he made a counteroffer of $25+$5+ against the buyers original $25 total. At this point, the buyer told the OP that his $25 offer was firm and non-negotiable, and then the OP filed an invalid backout report.

Now, if you in possession of an e-mail, PM, voicemail, or evidence in which the buyer said "sounds good" or "OK" or "sure" in direct response to the OP's counteroffer of $30+ total, then please post it.
____

gwaddict wrote:He offered to purchase the model for $25

I accepted, and as always I confirmed the particulars of the trade, as no mention was made of shipping and handling, I wanted to clarify his offer. So in an effort to be clear that I was accepting his offer at $25 + S&H I said as much.

NOPE. You did NOT confirm any particulars. If you did, you'd have something along these lines:

Sounds good. Just to summarize things as I understand them:

I have / you want:
{stuff}
= $25.00 Subtotal

+ $5.70 Shipping & Handling
= $30.70 Grand Total including Shipping

Payment to be via USPS Money Order. Shipping will be USPS First Class, with Delivery Confirmation.

As you will send payment first, then I will plan to ship against a basic timeline like this:
1. you send MO as payment
2. I confirm receipt
3. I ship & e-mail DC# within 2 Business Days of receipt
4. you confirm receipt
5. we exchange Feedback
If you mail the PMO by Friday (tomorrow), then I should receive it by Tuesday, and ship back by Thursday for Monday arrival. With any luck from the Post Office, things go "fast", and you have your {stuff] by the end of next week.

Please check the summary above and let me know if I've missed anything important or made any mistakes. Otherwise, I'll just need your address so I can get your cards boxed up and ready to mail.


Regards,

/John

*That* is how I do confirmations on every deal. If the OP replies positively "OK, sounds good", then there is absolutely no question whatsoever whether or not we have a deal, and what that deal entails.

gwaddict wrote:If he had not been in fact offering $25 + S&H he should have said.....

NOPE. He offered $25. Not "$25 +S&H". $25. Very simple. YOU are the one who tried to get him to pay more for shipping.

gwaddict wrote:His sending of the address implies his concurrence with my confirmation of the trade being $25 + S&H.

ABSOLUTELY NOT. You said that you would provide a total if he sent his address (which you did). You did not say that sending an address constituted blanket agreement to pay an undefined amount of shipping and handling.

gwaddict wrote:I fail to see how anyone thinks this isnt a back out.

Then maybe you should read my posts again. I outline the points very clearly.

gwaddict wrote:"I'll sell you any GW Battleforce box you want (valued at $90 or more) for just a penny ($0.01) plus S&H"
In regards to this point, it irks me as its suggests that I would be grossly overcharging for shipping and handling. Which I never ever do.

I would have charged Eric actual shipping, though the handling charges would be based on fair market rates for a Los Angeles lawyer working on a very small case for a client with an unlimited budget.

gwaddict wrote:"The buyer was very consistent in offering $25 for the model (shipped). The *seller* wanted more for shipping, but didn't get it"

The buyer did not say $25 shipped that would be a WHOLE different item and exactly how he should have offered. I did not want "more" for shipping but was clarifing his semi vauge offer.

His offer of $25 was perfectly clear. $25 total, no more, no less, no additional conditions. Your failure to understand a very simple offer is not his fault.
____

gwaddict wrote:If you think you can buy a direct mail item for 25% off retail with free shipping and no sales tax then I wish you the best of luck.

The last time we looked at bulk internet buying, Maelstrom Games of the UK quoted GW to the US at 30% off retail with international shipping included.

Let me try to post this again. [my last reply disappeared.]

I disagree. The buyer agreed to the deal by sending his address. If he was only willing to pay $25 including the shipping, his address wouldn't be needed.

He waited till after he got the price with shipping, then tried to renegoitate the deal when he found a new one elsewere.

He even states that. If his offer was $25 with shipping, he should've stated that when the seller said send me you address and I'll send you the total with shipping. If he's not agreeing to pay shipping, if his price is $25 total, there's no need to wait. There's no need for the buyer to go to the post office and get a shipping quote, then to pm it to him.

He used vague wording in his deal, and then later used specific wording getting out of it with the "prove to me I said that". His words implied that, then he got lawyerish when it didn't go that way.

Even if the final on this isn't a backout, the buyers trading practices have been shown.

Rule says this (bolded section mine):
------
Bartertown 'Trade' occurs when both parties have agreed to a transaction, be it a purchase (ie buyer-seller) or exhange of items and/or services, and have agreed to the terms of said transaction.
For example. Morlock and I agree to trade his Warmachine Cryx for my Warhammer Fantasy Chaos. We negotiate what we're trading specifically, we negotiate shipping terms, and we negotiate a time-frame for said shipping. Once we agree - and this can be as simple as "you're cool with that?" or as complex as sending a separate email that states the exact terms of everything agreed to along with a request to reply-with-agreement - the Trade is on.
-------

Price was agreed upon, but not shipping terms. I do not see how this is an actual backout. I can see that the "agreement" was very vauge, and can be read either way. However, when vauge, I think "no deal" should be assumed - not "we have a deal and I now get to fill in the blanks as I wish."

I hope an official back out would require a higher bar than this. This is a misunderstanding, not something malicious.

Sorry to clog this thread further, but what an agreement is, is fairly important. If I'm reading this rule wrong, I'd like to know.

Cole

cjsimchick wrote:Rule says this (bolded section mine):
------
Bartertown 'Trade' occurs when both parties have agreed to a transaction, be it a purchase (ie buyer-seller) or exhange of items and/or services, and have agreed to the terms of said transaction.
For example. Morlock and I agree to trade his Warmachine Cryx for my Warhammer Fantasy Chaos. We negotiate what we're trading specifically, we negotiate shipping terms, and we negotiate a time-frame for said shipping. Once we agree - and this can be as simple as "you're cool with that?" or as complex as sending a separate email that states the exact terms of everything agreed to along with a request to reply-with-agreement - the Trade is on.
-------

Price was agreed upon, but not shipping terms. I do not see how this is an actual backout. I can see that the "agreement" was very vauge, and can be read either way. However, when vauge, I think "no deal" should be assumed - not "we have a deal and I now get to fill in the blanks as I wish."

I hope an official back out would require a higher bar than this. This is a misunderstanding, not something malicious.

Sorry to clog this thread further, but what an agreement is, is fairly important. If I'm reading this rule wrong, I'd like to know.

Cole

But price includes shipping terms. This isn't Ebay or Amazon that there's 2 seperate listings for for price and shipping.

If you agree to the price, then you agree to the the entire price; who ever is paying the shipping, buyer or seller.
It's not 2 seperate parts.

FWIW: I fully support Linrandir's decision.

Well I respectfully disagree and as the folks in my camp seem to be in the minority I yield to the will of the majority and are okay with the post being deleted. I apologize for apparently bringing up a non issue and will try to be more careful in the future

As an aside and hopefully the last pm i will get from him. I received this pm from the buyer with the following contents
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: griffon for cash
Sent: Tue Feb 02, 2010 4:57 pm
From: jpdolarz
To: gwaddict


Re: griffon for cash
Sent: Sun Jan 31, 2010 10:21 pm
by jpdolarz

Hows 25 for the total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was in response to my last pm where I mentioned that he never said $25 total. Maybe I missed it or it didnt come through on my end but he looks to be attempting to quote a pm that doesnt exist and is making up support for his claim? Not that it matters as its apprently not a back out anyway.

Anyhow thanks everyone for your time I know that I learned a few things most importantly
How much I like Johns precise language he posted, I will try to emulate that in future trades to cut down on "backouts"
I will have to open my contract books up from law school again and re-read them
Made some changes to my signature line too

Now who wants to buy a unpainted, unbuilt Griffin

@GWaddict: Your signature line is not considered to be binding when you're negotiating a deal. You can say "Refer to my signature line," but you are required to state those terms outside of the signature line in any trade negotiation.

@ everyone else: Thank you for your comments and for keeping things polite. We are working to create more specific rules for deadbeat & bad trader reporting, so keep your eye on the Public Comments forum.

Thread Locked.