Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Bad GunBroker Transaction, Am I Wrong?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Shweboner, Oct 20, 2006.

?

Knowing that the photo is a "Stock Photo" Is my listing misleading?

  1. Yes, your auction is a misleading fraud!

    26 vote(s)
    36.6%
  2. No, your auction was fair and gave opportunity for bidders to see more pics, ask questions

    8 vote(s)
    11.3%
  3. You and the buyer are both at fault.

    37 vote(s)
    52.1%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Shweboner

    Shweboner Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    Newberg, OR
    Here is how it began.

    Last year or so I bought an Excellent condition Arsenal refinished Mosin Nagant 91/30 with 'laminated' stock/hex rec. from Century


    I decided that I was going to sell it a few weeks ago, I wanted an M38 instead.


    I listed the 91/30 as I described above, a link is posted below.

    http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?item=57428922

    Keep in mind that all the things I said in the auction were true, (round count, etc.)

    The buyer first complains that the rifle does not look like the picture. Although he acknowledges that he knew I had used a stock photo.

    He then emails me today that he took the rifle to a gunsmith, an "expert in milsurps and MNs". The gunsmith tells him that the rifle does not have a laminated stock, the bore is shot out and pitted and the muzzle measures .327 dia. (+/- .015 too big). Quote the dealer, I am guilty of "fraud".

    I know this is silly to ask you guys considering you have not seen the rifle. But considering the information given, the description in the listing and the fact that twice in the listing I gave potential buyers the opportunity to see detailed pics or to ask any questions.

    Did I mislead the guy? Did he not have the opportunity to ask info on details that were of such grave importance to him?

    Personally I feel that he is over reacting, and that for the $95 he paid, it was a damn nice rifle. I think he is just upset with himself for expecting something in particular and not asking questions before bidding. the rifle is not flawed and shot really well... Especially for a rifle built in the 30's.

    Am I wrong? Are we both at fault? is he a jerk?
     
  2. Critter183

    Critter183 member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    185
    I do not see where you said in the ad that this was stock photo and not an image of the actual rifle.
     
  3. Hanzo581

    Hanzo581 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,136
    Location:
    Chesapeake, Virginia
    You should have stated the picture was not of your actual rifle.
     
  4. Shweboner

    Shweboner Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    Newberg, OR
    The buyer knew it was a stock photo by the way.




    But I never said that it was an actual photo. And it is obviously stock.
     
  5. Hanzo581

    Hanzo581 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,136
    Location:
    Chesapeake, Virginia
    well why didn't you just post actual pitures of the rifle then?
     
  6. R.W.Dale

    R.W.Dale Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    11,398
    Location:
    Northwest Arkansas
    I voted both, You were wrong in using a stock photo and not saying so ( I never bid on stock photo'ed guns) The other feller is a jerk for expecting a benchrest rifle for 95 bucks. Besides sumpin smells fishy who in the world would pay a gunsmith $45 to evaluate a $95 rifle:scrutiny:

    Next time don't over describe the rifle. just say sumpin like; Used Mosin Nagant 91/30 Shoots good some minor dents and dings. And then add some GOOD photographs. I've sold many rifles on the net, and GOOD pictures are what does the selling for you. Another thing I do is I ALWAYS underrate the condition of the gun in question, helps keep buyers happy
     
  7. daysleeprx

    daysleeprx Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    723
    Location:
    Texas
    Good call.

    And regardless of whether or not he knew it was a stock photo, you still should have mentioned it in your ad. Now you have no way of proving that he knew that...he could easily say you were advertising the rifle in the stock photo.
     
  8. Shweboner

    Shweboner Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    Newberg, OR
    my camera doesnt take the greatest of pictures. I felt that the stock photo accurately depicted my rifle better than my digital could do.

    Its actually the same picture shown when I originally bought the rifle, I felt that it was a good one at the time, thats why I saved it, and used it in this auction. It is stock, but its darn close to the rifle I had.
     
  9. javacodeman

    javacodeman Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    293
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Let me just say that while I've never bought a firearm online, I have bought and sold a good many items on eBay. I think that it is overwhelmingly obvious that you used a stock photo to anyone that has spent more than five minutes purusing an online auction. I have even used stock photos in some of my auctions. That being said, I only use them in items like DVDs where an actual photo serves little purpose. That being said, while it may make you a more savvy seller to use actual photos, I don't think it makes you a fraudulent seller to obvious stock photos.

    In the end, you fairly represented your rifle in your word description and used a stock photo. If the buyer wanted more info, he/she should have emailed you and asked for it.
     
  10. javacodeman

    javacodeman Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    293
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Shweboner,

    I just realized that this was the over due rifle you talk about here http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=228049. I'm throwing the proverbial "cow poo" flag here on the buyer. I think this is a clear cut case of buyer's remorse. Your rifle takes a while to arrive. In the intervening time, your buyer wishes that he/she didn't make the purchase. Now he/she is scraping up any excuse to get his/her money back.:fire:
     
  11. Shweboner

    Shweboner Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    Newberg, OR
    javacodeman, I had considered that very same possibility.
     
  12. Hoploholic

    Hoploholic member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    219
    You were not forthright in your item description through the use of a stock photo and no mention of same. When someone points this out, you try to rationalize your misrepresentation. The buyer should have probably asked more questions. Not having seen the firearm in question, there is no telling what condition it was in.

    Here is my question for you. What is the intent of this thread? Where you hoping to get a bunch of Roaders to take your side and then throw the thread at the buyer in the hopes of somehow justifying your stand?

    I think you made a mistake. Personally, I would suggest you admit as much to yourself, learn from the experience and strive to be a better seller in the future. Call me a bung hole of the jaded variety, but I have a strong adversion to people not owning up to their own actions. I would try to meet the seller half way if he is willing and not a total jerk. If he wanted to send the rifle back on his dime for a refund I think that would be fare. I would also make sure that the rifle was the same I sent him as it looks like he is a dealer and might be trying to pull a fast one. Your milage may vary.
     
  13. Shweboner

    Shweboner Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    Newberg, OR

    The buyer and I have been conversing via email back and forth some, He has accused me of fraud and several other violations of GB policy. I was just wondering what you guys thought of the situation seeing as how all of us are gun buyers & sellers.

    I have no intention of talking about this thread with the buyer. Really I am done talking to him all together, his daily 4 paragraph emails have not made me want to say anything more at all.:banghead:
     
  14. TimboKhan

    TimboKhan Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2005
    Messages:
    8,139
    Location:
    Greeley, CO
    I don't know that I would call it fraud, exactly, but it seems like maybe you weren't absolutely clear. I mean, buyer beware, but you advertised that the rifle had "1000's of rounds left in it", and obviously his gunsmith disagrees. Unfortunatly, I think your inching your way into the wrong. Is a $95.00 gun worth all the hassle and damage to your reputation? You have a thread on him here, but who is to say he doesn't have a thread on you somewhere? Given the low value of the gun, I think I would refund him his purchase money, take the gun back and relist it with a more accurate ad. He can eat the cost of the inspection, and to mollify him, you can eat the cost of the shipping.

    Also, I personally would not buy ANYTHING with a stock photo, unless it were being bought new and from a reputable company, IE Cabelas, or Midway or whatever. Call me silly, but if I am buying from a private person, I want pictures that show me exactly what I am getting.
     
  15. Majic

    Majic Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2003
    Messages:
    5,370
    Location:
    Virginia
    Well you said it was a great rifle in awesome shape. Is the bore actually shot out and pitted? Was the stock picture a honest representation of the actual rifle?
     
  16. PinnedAndRecessed

    PinnedAndRecessed member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    1,542
    If his appraisal is accurate, then you misrepresented the rifle. I think you should give him his money back, including shipping. After all, you misrepresented the rifle (if his appraisal is accurate).

    However, just by looking at the ad, I would have no way of knowing that the picture is not the same rifle for sale.

    I think you should do the right thing.
     
  17. OldBillThundercheif

    OldBillThundercheif Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Messages:
    76
    If he is right about the condition you ripped him off. A bad photo of the rifle would have been better than a photo of some random rifle you found on the internet.

    From your description and your asking price he had the right to expect a rifle in immaculate condition with a perfect bore.

    You need to refund his cash and the shipping $$$.
     
  18. yongxingfreesty

    yongxingfreesty Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,396
    95 bucks is nothing, if it is in the condition you said it is in.

    if it is messed up, then you were wrong. can look at this both ways.
     
  19. MisterPX

    MisterPX Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    759
    Location:
    Amerika's Doyleland
    From what I see, he can ping you on the stock, and that's about it. Your ad does say arsenal refinished, and that sure doesn't mean new. The bore should be expected of a used surplus rifle. Did he ask for pics? Ask questions? Anyhow, I'd tell him you'll take the rifle back, he covers shipping, as you'll have to cover the transfer at your end.

    Just another reason I look at pics of the actual rifle I'm buying, and ask questions.
     
  20. Remander

    Remander Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    447
    The ad says:
    That indicates to me that the rifle in the pic is THIS rifle for sale. Perhaps folks who are used to being scammed on the internet know to ask if it is a lie and that the real rifle for sale is not THIS rifle as represented, but I can't fault a man for taking the advertiser at his (false) word.

    Give the man his freaking $95 back. It'd be a shame to go to hell over so little money.

    P.S. Would you be a little PO'd if you bought a car based on a beautiful stock pic, but the actual car was scratched and dented? I thought so.
     
  21. steelhead

    steelhead Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    736
    Location:
    Oregon
    You should have clearly stated it was a stock photo. You always need to account for the lowest common denominator. Some may have known it was a stock photo but many probably thought it was the rifle they were getting. However, if the seller contacted you before buying, and you told him it was a stock photo then that isn't so bad.

    Based on your willingness to let local bidders view the rifle, in person before bidding, gives you a lot of credibility. It shows that you had nothing to hide and the rifle was as advertised.

    My guess is this wingnut doesn't know what to expect in a milsurp and is BS'ing you on the appraisal from a local smith.
     
  22. razorburn

    razorburn member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    667
    If the gun is in the condition he described, then you absolutely need to return his money and take the gun back. If you originally bought the gun in that condition when it was also described as being almost pristine, then it's sad and regrettable that you got cheated. But it doesn't give you immunity when you pass it onto another person, you take the gun back and take it up with the guy who sold it to you. The gun is described as being in 99% condition. If it's like that, it's clearly not.
     
  23. larry starling

    larry starling Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    723
    Location:
    north carolina
    Your auction was misleading you should have posted a picture of your rifle. Never assume that buyers proff read the listings. They look at the picture and bid....:scrutiny:
     
  24. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    48,576
    Location:
    0 hrs east of TN
    I think you need to refund his money.
     
  25. Shweboner

    Shweboner Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    Newberg, OR
    The buyer claims to be a collector of milsurps, especially MNs, and I did infact ship to his C&R. Also, he told me that HE KNEW it was a stock pic.

    I do not believe his gunsmith story, that rifle was immaculate. I offered to pay a 3rd party gunsmith in his area to look at it, he has yet to respond to my offer.

    He has not asked for a refund or a new rifle, just complaining and making accusations.

    If he takes my offer of having an uninterested 'smith check it out on my $, and that gunsmith can verify the condition of the rifle, also verify the serial #'s (just in case this collector is trying to ditch a crappy MN on me) Then I will refund his money including shipping, pay for shipping back to me, and try to find him another rifle...


    thanks for all the responses, I appreciate it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page