ED Clark (BAD GUY!!)

You know, even with it being Ed....reading this whole thread, I was almost willing to accept that even though upon close inspection it was obviously a different animal than the one originally pictured, it MAY have been an accident that the wrong one was sent out. Trying to give "benefit of doubt" ad all of that. Sometimes Ed ain't as bright as he thinks he is, maybe he couldn't tell the difference between the 2 animals. Then Ed posts crap like this:

Originally Posted by Ed Clark

Anna Diaz
7646 Milton, Apt. D
Whittier, Ca. 90605

562 447-0810

scrletmoon_88@hotmail.com

I'm begining to wonder if the person speaking on this thread is the Anna Diaz I sent a beautiful perfect pair of Crested Geckos to?

Why would you have to put money out of your pockets for X-rays?

There are NO hip problems, could it possibly look like that because she laid a set of fertile eggs about a week before I shipped her to you?

I told you before you purchased the pair they were together breeding, you took so long paying for the pair she laid her first set of eggs with me while I waited to recieve your payment.

I was up front with you all the way.

I made you an offer of a free baby red crestie that I would pay shipping for to you and you agreed to that. I asked you if that would make you happy and satisfied and you agreed.

So I will send that red crestie when I feel its safe to ship it.

First of all, the was NO legitimate reason to be posting Anna's personal info, other than perhaps intimidation? A little bit of "getting even"? Completely uncalled for, Ed.

Then there's the fact, that once again, Ed is totally and completely ignoring the REAL issues at hand. It is completely obvious that is NOT the animal Anna paid for, yet Ed still maintains it is....if somehow, someway, it was possibly an accident *coughcoughgag* that the wrong animal was sent out, a simple apology, and offer to send the animal Anna actually paid for could have solved the whole matter.

But instead, as usual, Ed avoids the whole matter, and just makes it worse with his continuing to lie about it, thinking someone will be dumb enough to believe it. How many times have I told you, Ed, that a mistake ceases to be a mistake (if it ever was a mistake) when you start telling lies to cover it up instead of making it right? That has certainly become your common modus operandi though, hasn't it? Turn it around on the buyer, never put any of the blame on Ed for Ed's screwups (or flat-out dishonesty, depending on how you look at it). What a crock of .

And then, of course, the wonderful gift of the baby crested....that doesn't make the deal right in ANY way, shape, or form....if that's what Anna ended up agreeing to in hopes of getting some sort of satisfaction, and perhaps not knowing any better, I guess that's what will make you think you have fulfilled your end of the deal....but it's painfully obvious to others reading that you're just skipping out on your responsibilities again.

You'd think by now, I'd learn that trying to give people like Ed the benefit of doubt would bite me in the ass....

The right thing to do (at least, this is what I would do) would be to have Anna return the female crested to Ed, Ed ship back the actual female that was pictured in the ad AND include a free red baby crested. Ed should pay shipping both ways.

Originally Posted by KelliH

The right thing to do (at least, this is what I would do) would be to have Anna return the female crested to Ed, Ed ship back the actual female that was pictured in the ad AND include a free red baby crested. Ed should pay shipping both ways.

That's one way to look at it. Another one would be to have Anna send the gecko for a full reimbursement of all expenses incurred. It might be better though to just leave the gecko with Anna and return the money. There's no need to subject an animal to a second unnecessary shipping, particularly risky during the warm summer months.

Well, once again Ed has made me rethink my position on him.
I first thought he was being a good guy and sending a baby crested as a nice gesture. Now it appears he just shafted this buyer and hasn't changed his ways at all when dealing with people.

Ed, what happened to the gecko you were supposed to send? Do you still have it? Did you sell it to someone else?

How about giving this buyer a full refund? You sent a different animal. Forget the free baby (which may not ever be sent anyway) and give her back her money so she can get a gecko from someone that will send her what she paid for.

Wow Ed, can't even keep your stories straight? Hmmm that was a nice way to kick your self right in the face. Well it looks like Ed will be only a viewer to this thread like he has done to all of his previous threads that have called him out on his bad ways, scams, and lies. Ed you sure are a dirty piece of work. I don't know how you can scam others left and right and sleep at night.

Anna I do hope Ed does make right on his part and either sends you another female or sends you the right female that was pictured. Sadly this has been a problem with Ed MANY times before and those on the receiving end have been shafted in the end.

I don't think Ed would have come here to post in the beginning if others hadn't already started casting doubt on the idea of different females. Once that ball started rolling, it made it easy for him to come in, throw a few stones, and get out.

Originally Posted by Ed Clark

I told you before you purchased the pair they were together breeding, you took so long paying for the pair she laid her first set of eggs with me while I waited to recieve your payment.

it seems like the complimentary "red" baby would be kind of a no brainer as well since it very well may have come from this pair. seems only fair that the TS gets the eggs or offspring from the parents she bought (or was buying).

Originally Posted by doyle033

it seems like the complimentary "red" baby would be kind of a no brainer as well since it very well may have come from this pair. seems only fair that the TS gets the eggs or offspring from the parents she bought (or was buying).

Hmmmm...you bring up an interesting point...

While I think that a strong argument could be made either way here, you do bring up an interesting thought in that the "red" baby that Ed was going to send her was probably a baby from this female...which means that it probably wouldn't really be a "red."

Another thought...Ed said that he was going to send her a female baby once it was a couple of weeks old. I've kept, and bred, a number of cresties in the past, and I've never been able to reliably sex an animal at two weeks old (however, I haven't really tried to either). I'm interested in knowing what some of the other people who have bred cresties think about this...can any of you reliably sex a crestie at two weeks old? I suspect that Ed was just going to send her a two week old baby, and "hope" that it was a female. If so, then it's just another example of his lack of honesty/integrity.

Originally Posted by Dr Owens

...can any of you reliably sex a crestie at two weeks old?

I've been able to find pores on some at about 2-4 months, at about 4 grams (indicating male) - they hatch out around 2 grams or so. However, due to the varying belly patterns in cresties, it's often difficult to pick out pores at such a tiny size, even with 10-20x magnification. I personally haven't come across a breeder who would guarantee sex at two months, much less two weeks. I wouldn't make that guarantee myself.

You'll find a lot of "probable male" or "probable female" statements for juveniles (maybe 7-8 grams/several months and up), but not 2-week hatchlings.

You can loupe sex cresteds but I have not heard of anyone doing it at 2 weeks. I know several bigger breeders loupe sex but even then they often put in the disclaimer that they don't see any pores and I don't think they would guarantee it's sex unless it is obviously male and the pores really show. Also this isn't done usually until they are at least 12 grams as opposed to a two week old baby at 2 grams.