The Serpentarium- Lodi, Ca

I will say that you have retained our dignity in a situation that many would not have. Which is something that is very noteworthy.

How ever I will also say that in my opinion these questions are still on topic. The reason being if I understand the intent of the BOI, it's purpose is to help both buyers and sellers get informed on the business practices of people we may potentially do business with. So as long as the questions are pertaining to your business practices I believe it's still on topic and staying within' the intent of the thread.

I will also say that while you have cleared up some things in regards to the business transfer I still find there are questions which went unanswered. I understand now that you say you where already in the process of filing bankruptcy. I also understand that your saying you never claimed to pay Mr. Cullingham which is not the same as saying you didn't your just you making sure we understand you never made such claims. You've also stated you feel you are responsible for your success, noted and I'm not challenging it.

What I don't understand is you say Mr. Cullingham made the mistake of his own accord without speaking to you first to transfer the business to you, after that fact did you pay him the remainder of what he asked for? If you didn't can I ask why?

After discussing the topic of Bill's long-standing history with the business, along with his achievements, etc., we have decided that it would be fair to create an About Us page on our website that accurately explains the ENTIRE history of The Serpentarium. We have absolutely no problem with giving Bill the credit he deserves and would gladly do so.


Bill,

In order for the write up to be truly complete and accurate, most of it would have to come from you. Are you interested? If so, please email me when you have something ready and I'll get it posted right away.

Best regards,

Robert Coral
The Serpentarium

So we have 20 plus pages of a thread about a guy who was unhappy with a snake, was offered a refund and refused it. So far concerns the actual topic of this thread, the history of the Serpentarium aside, its rather obvious that as a seller, Robert did indeed do the right thing and offered this kid a full refund.
How would it serve him to intentionally order a wild caught snake to deceive a customer who thought he was ordering a captive bred one, only to offer him a full refund and essentially take a loss and waste a bunch of his own time? Over a $100? Over a snake he neither keeps nor breeds in his store? For a store that has two locations, a distribution center and expensive billboards? Seems highly doubtful.

I think Brandon needs to rethink how exactly this all went down and apologize to Robert. He either takes the refund and returns the snakle or he doesnt. Its really so, so simple of a matter its ridiculous.

NOt to mention that besdie a few sores (i dont know much about snake health or what infection looks like on a snake) the snake, which has been pointed out is a very difficult species EVEN WHEN CAPTIVE BRED looks to otherwise have a healthy weight...

Brandon or GBU people....Does this snake eat and drink?

Originally Posted by Kolt4-5

How ever I will also say that in my opinion these questions are still on topic. The reason being if I understand the intent of the BOI, it's purpose is to help both buyers and sellers get informed on the business practices of people we may potentially do business with. So as long as the questions are pertaining to your business practices I believe it's still on topic and staying within' the intent of the thread.

Fair enough, but there has to be an eventual end. With members like Wilomn, I don't ever see that happening in this case (no offense intended on him).

Originally Posted by Kolt4-5

What I don't understand is you say Mr. Cullingham made the mistake of his own accord without speaking to you first to transfer the business to you, after that fact did you pay him the remainder of what he asked for? If you didn't can I ask why?

His name is spelled, Gillingham.

When the business unfortunately became dissolved through BK by the state - when Bill transferred the building, not business (an important distinction), our contract became void/null. When we sought legal council to determine the best course of action going forward, we were strongly advised not to make payments to Bill, due to potential legal ramifications.

Originally Posted by TheSerpentarium

When the business unfortunately became dissolved through BK by the state - when Bill transferred the building, not business (an important distinction), our contract became void/null. When we sought legal council to determine the best course of action going forward, we were strongly advised not to make payments to Bill, due to potential legal ramifications.

And what was that?


The only reason why I think that would be so is that it would show the debt wasn't charged off in the bankruptcy and you might be actually liable to pay the full amount. Why would it matter? Unless of course you don't want that obligation.

Originally Posted by laterob

That's right! I forgot about that. And Jeremy still let him vend, even though he opened up shop a few miles away. Wonder how that's going...

We actually approached Jeremy before we opened our Elk Grove location to ask if he minded. Jeremy is a great guy and I'm sure he would gladly attest to us doing so.

Robert Coral
The Serpentarium

Originally Posted by Dennis Hultman

And what was that?


The only reason why I think that would be so is that it would show the debt wasn't charged off in the bankruptcy and you might be actually liable to pay the full amount. Why would it matter? Unless of course you don't want that obligation.

I myself am also curious as to the nature of the negative legal ramifications of paying Mr. Gillingham off would be. I won't venture a guess as to what they are but I would like to know what they are.

Also if I'm understanding this correctly does that mean that Mr Gillingham only got payed that $53,000 from the bankruptcy settlement he mentioned earlier, or did some money transfer hands prior?

I also want to say that believe it or not in my opinion these last couple of post's give some true insight into the difficulties of running a business. I was aware of many of what's been posted with the exception of perhaps bankruptcy law. I know personally about a lot of the bankruptcy laws in NY because I had considered declaring it in the past but opted instead not to go through with it. I'm not sure how the laws differ in other locals and there have been a lot of changes to said laws over the past couple of years. For those not in the know I think this thread is fairly informative. People are seeing first hand how things we don't consider or are aware of can really compromise someone trying to go into business or someone selling one.

Originally Posted by Kolt4-5

I also want to say that believe it or not in my opinion these last couple of post's give some true insight into the difficulties of running a business.... People are seeing first hand how things we don't consider or are aware of can really compromise someone trying to go into business or someone selling one.

yep, thats for sure

Originally Posted by Kolt4-5

I myself am also curious as to the nature of the negative legal ramifications of paying Mr. Gillingham off would be. I won't venture a guess as to what they are but I would like to know what they are.

It's not that hard to understand. By making payments it would be acknowledgement of the debt still after bankruptcy. His expanding now, presumably out of bankruptcy, and his being mindful of legal and financial concerns. Morality of the situation has taken a backseat.

In my humble opinion of course.