Lucille,
The days of "caveat emptor" are not gone. They will outlive the both of us. Take this case about "colorful" vs. "not colorful" into any attorney's office and watch him or her try not to be disrespectful in telling you to "learn from your mistakes". That includes if you are carrying a large-text copy of the entire UCC. If the claim is for $75, what person is going to spend hundreds if not more trying to recover it, where the court will scoff at awarding all except filing fees, etc?
And this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragonman22:
3rd and most important. Whose opinion do I value more. Sara, some 20 year old girl from Pennsylvania or Mr Schmitt the well known and respected owner of Suncoast Herps.
|
... is not this:
Quote:
Originally posted by Lucille:
Cheap shot. This is known as an 'ad hominem' attack: instead of addressing the issues themselves you go after some personal quality of whoever posted.
|
One of these days you'll get to the law school class about "expert witnesses", and the fundamental basis of civil opinions, that being that some are worth more than others. One entity voluntarily rendered an opinion here contrary to another. They do not carry the same weight for exactly the reason stated. It was anything but "ad-hominem". He did not say she was ugly. He did not say she was stupid. He did not say she was fat.
IMO, John S. has taken time in this thread to present sound opinions and hopefully mediate a solution. Mike S. was on the money too. The seller has been willing to do something. What this thread has done is establish a basis upon which people can evaluate both buyer and seller. I would extend the theory that that is the main accomplishment of the BOI, regardless of what folks wish it to be.