Home Forums Gear Free Classifieds Do NOT SALE! ANYTHING

Nope not at all. I assumed three day inspection was part of the transaction and when he told me he already spent the money it pissed me off, that is bs. Like I said, I assumed the three day inspection applied here, that is my fault. I should have specifically asked about the 3-day inspection. Noted!

Bricktop

another appeal to the Masses

I think it is you who replies because you cannot help it. You want everyone to think how "cute" you are and how smart you are, so you use language and arguments that you think will make you sound cute and smart. Its a very common thing. Used alot, of course, by politicians and people who claim to be leaders.

Do you think it might be possible for you to enter one discussion without commenting once on the personalities of the other people in the discussion, and stay strictly on the merits of the discussion?

Waputi, I don't smoke. I don't understand that at all, stated that to you right from the beginning. I will still argue that

I agree totally. I do believe Donnie follows throught with his sales accuratly. It's his buying method that I question. He almost always asks for above and beyond the original agreement and when he doesn't get it, he comes back with threats of lawsuits. What a wiener.

Jeff

I have sold a lot of items here on 24 and have always assumed a 3 days inspection as well.

I keep assuming a supermodel is going put me up as a kept man, but it ain't happened yet and I ain't getting any younger. I think I'll sue, too.

I don't suppose it ever occurred to you that approaching your seller with an accusatory tone didn't help much either, did it?

There is no "understood" inspection time required with a sale. Only if stated in the original agreement. I agree most of us on here are willing to give an inspection period if the buying party agree to pay shipping. I'm sure all my brothers and sisters here would say the same. There was no inspection period with this purchhase.

Donnie,

Answer my question please.

Jeff

I obviously didn't start out like that. I was told if the rifle was sent back it would be sold to the highest bidder and my money not refunded.

I should ask the same of you.

I "assumed" a 3-day inspection period on that POS rangefinder and was told not to send it back, but did anyway.

Well, if there were no inspection period, then the only questions left are whether there was a verbal promise that the gun was in a certain condition, and then whether it was not in that condition. As I stated in the begining, condition is a very subjective thing, which is why there should have been an inspection period. None of this would have come about, including all of the swearing, arguing, and hard feelings.

There is always an assumed inspection period. I am sure everyone who buys something here assumes that when it arrives they have an inspection period. I have assumed and will not anymore.

Privatepilot

Was there a specific promise that the gun was in a certain condition? And if so, why do you say specifically that it was not in the condition you thought you were told it was in?

I will submit all emails to whomever needs them with the original pics of the rifle.
I never gave an inspection period of any sort.
U take the pics he sent longarch n the pics I sent him tell me its not the same rifle n I will glady offer my name here up for banning.
after u have read the original emails .

Isn't the very definition of assume counter to your argument?

assume: 1.To authenticate by means of belief; to surmise; to suppose to be true, especially without proof.

Gun was described in a certain condition and yes I do not think it is in that condition, so I ask to send it back.

I agree. I think the assumption argument fails here. I think that an inspection period means that a person can look the item over for a few days and then send it back for little or no reason. From the postings of the seller here it appears that was not offered, and if it were not offered then it could not be accepted.

But there still remains the issue of condition. Yes, photos were sent. The question remains, did those photos adequately show the condition that the item was described as. if they did, then the matter is over. If not, then the buyer has a valid claim.

That was quoted to you by the FFL dealer following your continued raging accusations of a civil court law suit. The decision was reversed when we did a little research on you other dealings. I say bring your a$$ to Chattanooga and sue. I would so enjoy Don reaping the benefits of the counter-suit.

Again, do you deny any of the posting of our email conversation?

Jeff

I said I assumed. Won't happen again

Seems what's good for the goose, is not good for the gander. He wants an "inspection period", but doesn't grant the same. [bleep] him and 22WRF!