Conned on ebay. I quit!

[VapidLapid]

Agreed that RH is responsible for the lengthy persistence of this thread both from her behavior in the failed transaction and her presence(s) here in the thread. I think one of the reasons this thread has gotten so much attention and response is the outrage many feel about one of us perpetrating such an egregious wrong against another one of us. Earlier someone likened this thread to a trial by public opinion, but really it is the best fit for a jury of peers that will be found. I think the anger articulated in these pages toward RH is a function of the outrage and betrayal felt by the majority of the PS pack that one of our own members could behave like this.

 

[sweetjettagirl04]

I offered kelpie the money for a refund of the stone and AGL fees, minus what I paid for the stone that was damaged, as well as offer her a recipt for what I paid. I highly doubt she will accept it because it's not the 'grand super profit' people think are made on gemstones, But it has been offered. If she wants to file a claim to recoup the rest then that's her business not mine.
As far as the (yet again) speculations about my business with my attorney, that's my business .

This is not right. You should offer to refund Kelpie for the stone and the AGL fees, with no subtraction for what you paid. Your math is off, first you offer a 150% guarantee (my pet peeve, I'm not sure where you went to school but there is no such thing as 150%) and now your idea of a refund is the OP money minus your costs. What is wrong with you?

Why should kelpie have to get a refund MINUS anything? If you have a 150% guarantee, you should stick by it, and not try to pass your cost on to someone who was none the wiser at the time of the transaction. She should be entitled to a full refund - which equals 100% of the money paid TO YOU. If you have fees that you can't recoup - that's the cost of doing business, is it not?

 

[ruby59]

The stone should not have been moved at all, especially not overseas, until there is a clear path and plan for it with the packaging to be presented to the postal inspector. I fear that having sent it overseas after the alleged damaging incident will invalidate any claim on the insurance that was purchased by AGL on Kelpie's behalf on seller's behalf. The hot potato shenanigans are going to be the cause of more contention than has already existed in this failed transaction. Especially if the seller purchased insurance for the mailing to Africa. Now no claim of damage can be verified, or rather traced to which posting of the parcel. Her best hope now is that the parcel is lost and the post office compensates her. OP is right not to accept the parcel. The only return is her money.

Some excellent points here. So what is stopping RH from claiming the "damage" occurred when she just tried to send it back to Kelpie in Tanzania, and now submitting an insurance claim?

Agreed Minous. But the thing that I dont get, that I haven't understood from the get go, is why Kelpie's involvement is needed in this at all. She wasn't involved with the packaging of the parcel from AGL, she did not bring the parcel to the PO, she did not purchase the postage or the insurance. I mentioned like 12 pages ago that the insurance info should be on the PO receipt that whoever bought the postage and insurance has. The insurance issue is entirely between the sender and the receiver. What happens is the receiver notifies the sender that the packages was not received in good condition. Sender then provides the insurance number, usually just sends a scan of it by email. receiver takes damaged goods and all packing material TO THEIR PO, the PO from which the parcel was delivered for evaluation. Just because AGL received the stone from Kelpie does not mean that they wont talk to RH about the claim, since they did send it off to her. I wonder though, if there was no actual damage to the package, and so presumably the stone was damaged by bouncing around loose in a box, if the PO will just say that they obviously didn't damage it if it wasn't properly packed by the sender. That then is where the question should lie.

However,
since the stone and the packaging have been sent off to Africa, an international and RURAL UNDERDEVELOPED location, it might easily take a month to get there, only to be refused, and then a month to get back if it is returned to sender (RH) at all. As Danny sagely noted, this leaves the stone unavailable for adjudication for too long a time for there to be a chance of filing a claim. The only way I see for a claim now to be made is if the parcel goes missing on it's way to, or back from Africa. Which quite likely could happen. And that, then, is a claim that would be filed by RH.

Thank you for putting it in all caps, so I would be sure to see it. I guess on this board, if you do not agree, you are attacked. I do find interesting the comment about how some of you would never deal with RH. Being in the business world, I can tell you that you would be a company's worst nightmare, and most would show you the door.

Also, RH was attacked because people thought she was keeping the money and the stone. Now she is being attacked because she returned the stone.

You are wise Amethyst poster. Too bad people will not listen.

 

[VapidLapid]

"Thank you for putting it in all caps, so I would be sure to see it. I guess on this board, if you do not agree, you are attacked. I do find interesting the comment about how some of you would never deal with RH. Being in the business world, I can tell you that you would be a company's worst nightmare, and most would show you the door.

Also, RH was attacked because people thought she was keeping the money and the stone. Now she is being attacked because she returned the stone."

RH was not under scrutiny because people thought she was keeping both the money and the stone. It was fleetingly speculated by someone that at one time she had both, but that in itself was not even the point of that speculation. You are deliberately, and intentionally confusing the issues. One cannot return to anyone what was never theirs. The stone was not returnable to kelpie because kelpie never owned it.

On this forum you are attacked when you
steal
post deceitful information
post specifically to confuse the issue or lead it astray

 

[ruby59]

"Thank you for putting it in all caps, so I would be sure to see it. I guess on this board, if you do not agree, you are attacked. I do find interesting the comment about how some of you would never deal with RH. Being in the business world, I can tell you that you would be a company's worst nightmare, and most would show you the door.

Also, RH was attacked because people thought she was keeping the money and the stone. Now she is being attacked because she returned the stone."

RH was not under scrutiny because people thought she was keeping both the money and the stone. It was fleetingly speculated by someone that at one time she had both, but that in itself was not even the point of that speculation. You are deliberately, and intentionally confusing the issues. One cannot return to anyone what was never theirs. The stone was not returnable to kelpie because kelpie never owned it.

On this forum you are attacked when you
steal
post deceitful information
post specifically to confuse the issue or lead it astray

After this I am going to take the wise Amethyst poster's advice in that it has all been said and resaid, and this thread is only making the OP and RH dig in their heels more. It now has to be left up to them to come to an agreement.

As for your reasons for why people are attacked, you were not there. So you have no way of knowing what information is deceitful or who is posting confusing information. Everyone here who was not in on the original transaction is posting based on opinions ONLY. So no one is leading anyone astray.

 

[SB621]

Last chance and you are only getting this chance because new people are now the instigators.

NO personal insults or I will need to close the thread. Please stick to the facts. Mean posts will be removed and I will take other actions if necessary.

Sorry Ella!!!! I will work on my inner , promise!

 

[Arkteia]

This thread teaches us a lot, and not because of this specific situation. Basically, it teaches us not to put too much trust, sadly, in known vendors or vendors we like. It also shows how unsafe ebay is, and how little protection we get from it. Many of us buy on ebay, like it - well, let us all see how easily we can get burned there. Personally, I am going to make serious conclusions and call everyone who owes me $$ or has been keeping my stones for a long time. Things like this can happen to any of us, and while this situation is clearly unusual, it, alas, can be repeated. I hope certain resolution can be achieved, sooner or later.

Ebay could not help. Paypal is questionable. Now all of it is in the hands of Kelpie. I hope she has enough strength and time to get her money back. If she succeeds, it will be a great tool for all of us.

It is up to PS-ers whether to post or not, but we should give Kelpie the opportunity to post about the outcome of this situation. If this situation gets resolved, and I hope it will, sooner or later, and If she opens a new thread, it will be confusing to many people who have not read the first one. It is up to everyone whether to continue posting here or not, but this whole situation illustrates only too well how one can be "burned" by being too trusting.

Threads get closed for serious reasons or violations of the rules. Emotions got high here, but I do not see any formal rules being violated. Closing a thread just because people got tired would create a bad precedent.

BTW, I closed my case with Paypal, but my bank is still sending me letters asking if I want to pursue and indicating their willingness to get involved.

 

[LD]

Because my attorney advised me to make sure all requests for information for a claim are sent through email, and thats what I am doing. An email request is not 'jumping through hoops'. It would take 10 seconds of her time, and documents all her requests and my follow through with both of our names on the email letter head. Legally, there is no way to tell if Im me, or kelpie is kelpie behind screen names.

For someone who wants to resolve an issue so bad (and this could be a good resolve for both of us), a quick email should not be an issue. Still no email. I expect next excuse will be the claim period has passed (I believe you only have 21 days). Like I said above, I think this is an endless battle and it is all about the drama at this point.

As a matter of fact I do have photos of the packaging. That was never requested by kepie, although I have informed her through email before that it is available if she wants it. I was sure to take pictures of everything after receiving the damaged stone.

As far as any other details, I am not going to post that on this forum because this matter is between myself kelpie and who ever is doing the claims. LD is not a party in this issue, and I have no obligation to give her further details.

You haven't been asked to. The question by Lavatea was "are you willing to give the full refund to a third party to hold on the basis that Kelpie submits a claim as LD suggested?" I have NO intention of holding anybody's money as I am NOT neutral because I do not believe you have acted as a responsible vendor should.

If you have any intention to resolve this you wouldn't (a) try to frighten people by saying you have an attorney - quite clearly unbelievable (b) you would have emailed Kelpie your original receipt for the stone (c) sent her photographs of the packaging you said was damaged and unsuitable for purpose so that Kelpie could contact AGL and the postal insurance to verify your claim. Trying to say Kelpie has to request them clearly is playing for time. Kelpie please email RH and request (b) and (c) and then that can be put to bed.

It's so simple RH. You just pay up and wait for the refund of your original cost IF the insurers believe your claim. It's up to them to make that decision not Kelpie but you have to co-operate and make the first move. You've got the money, the stone and the packaging. Kelpie has nothing and you can't expect her to move mountains now when you hold all the cards.

 

[Barrett]

.......................

 

[Barrett]

............. cats in hats
..cracked gem, no refund..what was that we were talking about??????
"look at the kitty...ahhh"

 

[VapidLapid]

I bet that kitten would cook up into a nice pie

 

[Barrett]

I bet that kitten would cook up into a nice pie

 

[distracts]

After reading all million pages of this thread, the thing I don't get is where Rocksgems states, pre-purchase, that she does not accept returns if the item is damaged. It is certainly not on the ebay listing, which means it must have been in private correspondence with Kelpie. Or else there was no return policy. I mean, unless Rocksgems stipulated in the original deal that she would not accept the return (or that the sale would be considered completed with the stone belonging to Kelpie) if the stone was damaged, I don't think she really has a right to keep the money. I sympathize with her, as I know what it's like to have to bite it due to an accidental error on a transaction, but I think at some point you have to admit that even if you did not intend wrongdoing (which I honestly don't think she did - I think the prevarication likely stemmed from panic over what to do, rather than malice), the responsibility still lies with you, and then make it right, no matter how much of a cluster$@*! things have expanded into in the meantime.

Also, I am very fond of photographs of cats in hats.

 

[minousbijoux]

Amguy, if you don't marry LD, will you marry me? My dogs would eat the kittens in hats, but oh well...sigh

 

[LD]

Amguy I love you to bits but I honestly feel it's a little disrespectful to Kelpie to divert the thread. I understand your reasoning but .....

 

[Ella]

Please be respectful of the OP and do not derail the thread.

 

[Barrett]

 

[colormyworld]

I really can't help but wonder. How many posting here would be more than happy to issue a refund had they sold a stone on DB and the recipient returned said stone back damaged. Would you just refund the money and take the loss?

 

[ededdeddy]

I really can't help but wonder. How many posting here would be more than happy to issue a refund had they sold a stone on DB and the recipient returned said stone back damaged. Would you just refund the money and take the loss?

The recipient didn't return the stone damaged. The lab that the both the buyer and seller authorized a report to be issued from sent back the stone with the alleged damage to it. Also from what I am reading the damage was never mentioned to the buyer until after she began to pursue the refund that the seller had promised her once the stone turned out not to be what the seller had described in the sale. The seller has already established that the buyer didn't damage the stone, it was allegedly damaged in transit between when it was sent by the buyer/seller authorized lab and when then seller received the stone. The seller documented the photos where the alleged damaged occurred but did not document the poor/shoddy packaging that the stone had when she received it back from the gem lab. Also by resending it back to the seller that she knew would not take delivery on it, she herself put the stone in peril by resending it again.

 

[colormyworld]

This question is not about the OP. This is a question about a hypothetical stone that YOU have sent out to a potential buyer

 

[VapidLapid]

Yes, I would absolutely refund. One hundred Fifty percent. Promptly. And if I was hoping to have the would-have-been buyer's assistance in making an insurance claim for the damage I would go even further out of my way to make that person happy. If I sold a stone that checked out at a lab not to be what I said it was I would be embarrassed and apologetic.

 

[FrekeChild]

I really can't help but wonder. How many posting here would be more than happy to issue a refund had they sold a stone on DB and the recipient returned said stone back damaged. Would you just refund the money and take the loss?

I've dealt with this with another PSer. I wrote her back saying that I was sorry, what did she want to do, did she want a refund? Did she want to return the stone? And I agreed to her terms because they were more than reasonable.

 

[T L]

It depends on the seller. If someone returned a chipped stone that was worth a significant amount to the seller, then I can see if they would have a problem with it. If the stone was inexpensive, then I could see them "eat the damage," especially if they wanted to retain a good customer reputation. I've dealt with both kinds of sellers, and like Lisa said, she "needed the grief less than the money."

I am not a vendor however, so I cannot place myself in their shoes as easily.

 

[lavatea]

This question is not about the OP. This is a question about a hypothetical stone that YOU have sent out to a potential buyer

But why are we hypothesizing about a situation that doesn't even match the OP's situation? How is it relevant?

 

[Imdanny]

Agreed. If the analogy is not relevant then it is not relevant. If I sold something as "A" and it turned out to be "B," I'd have to give the money back. I haven't sold jewelry but I have sold my watches on watch forums. There is no hypothetical or technicality that would allow me to know I sent something I misrepresented and something the buyer never agreed to buy and to keep the buyer's money. I don't think my perspective on this or my views are unusual or hard to understand.

 

[Arkteia]

I think it is about mutual understanding and courtesy. As in any transaction, both parties should be trying to invest into a good vendor-customer relationship. After all, initially it started on a very good note.

 

[risingsun]

When Rockhugger was fairly new to this site, I had occasion to "speak" with her. She was an admitted stone flipper and proud of it. She was teaching two relative newcomers how they could learn to flip stones, in this case diamonds, in order to make some money from the transaction. This really bothered me and I told her so. PS is a consumer advocacy site and we warn people how to recognize and avoid doing business with "vendors" such as herself. She became very angry with me and told me to leave her alone. I told her I would not leave her practices alone as they were not conductive to the spirit of PS. She threatened to report me to admin. I told her she was welcome to do so and said that I had already reported her. Shortly after that, her website was taken down and she stopped posting here. From my perspective, her behavior to me, on a much smaller scale, replicates her behavior with the OP.

I will admit RH has a unique sense of logic, which suits her purposes. I think this situation is straightforward. The OP never owned the the stone. I have seen nothing in the pictures to indicate that the stone is cracked. I know a cracked stone when I see one. My emerald was cracked and there was no doubt about it. It is up to the owner of the stone, Rockhugger, to take steps to recover the loss due to the authenticity issue. It has absolutely nothing to do with refunding the OP's money. It is not the OP's stone. On RH's site she indicates that her stones are authentic and she has them tested prior to listing them. Evidently, this did not happen. It's more than time to make this right.

As they say on my sportscar forum, IBTL (in before the lock).

 

[T L]

RS,
Please excuse my stupidity, but what is a "stone flipper?" Thanks, just curious.

 

[risingsun]

RS,
Please excuse my stupidity, but what is a "stone flipper?" Thanks, just curious.

That is when someone buys low and sells high. You look for a diamond that may not be the best quality and negotiate a low purchase price and turn it around to sell for a higher price. You market it in such a way that someone will take the bait, so to speak.

 

[Barrett]

or.... buy from one venue then turn around, mark up the price, and sell it at the same venue
or... buy low sell high and do it all in a short amount of time....like Risingsun said
"got to flip this work"