NavyLCDR
member
The seller can set the rules.
The seller sets the rules in all sales.
Always has, always will.
So, I buy a handgun for $600, send the $600 to the seller, they cash my check, and then call me the next day after my check clears and say, "Gee, I'm sorry. I thought I could drop that handgun in a priority mail flat rate box and mail it to your FFL for $20. I found out I can't do that and I have to pay $70 to FEDEX for overnight shipping, so you are going to have to pay me $50 more before I can ship your gun to your FFL."
And that is my responsibility as the buyer because I didn't contact the seller before I bid and ask them, "Hey, you know you can't just drop that handgun in the mail, right?"
I mean - that is exactly what you guys are saying in this case.
When you read the actual ad, were you clear on what he wanted?
It doesn't matter what the seller wanted. What matters is what the seller advertised were going to be the conditions of the sale. If a certain condition of the sale is not advertised, and it is not required by law, then it is the seller's responsibility to fulfill what was promised in his offer for sale. The OP is meeting all the requirements of law for the seller to ship the gun and is meeting all the requirements that were specified in the sale ad. That is ALL the buyer is responsible for doing.
I did suggest a call to the seller to try to clear up the perceived issue.
I guess you missed that part in your need to be right.
I didn't miss that part at all. I believe that the absolute biggest problem in this country is that people refuse to take responsibility for their own ignorance and always trying to make other people responsible for it. In this case, some people are suggesting that the buyer take on the responsibility for the seller's ignorance.