Andrew Hermes of Arizona Tortoise Compound

Originally Posted by mikepanzarella

I have a few question trying to understand the limits of someones TOS.
this was a partial $1000 cash/tort for another tort.
being this was not from the sellers stock was this advertised on the website where the terms are located?
is your TOS sales specific or covers both trade and sales?
was he notified of your terms?written or otherwise.
would the TOS be valid if he does not know about them?

IMO you should atleast be able to guarantee your product arrives alive.

I already posted above on this, TOS that us Breeders use are not legally binding if taken to court. The buyer/user must be sent a link to it and agree to it to be accepted within the community. Courts dismiss these types as they are subject to change which puts them under a browsewrap TOS. Indicating the user/buyer must search the site for the TOS in order to see them indicating they then must Agree. Even ones that are Click to agree dont hold up in court much.

Thank you Rich
I did read your post but there was some confusion from other posts saying they would.

Clickwraps aka Clickthrough TOS depending on the judge and how they are laid out can hold in court, as their not as easy to alter. You have seen these types when installing software.

Originally Posted by mikepanzarella

Thank you Rich
I did read your post but there was some confusion from other posts saying they would.

Originally Posted by ApexPredatorBoids

I did find an interesting article on the subject.

The blue text in my quoted post is a link. It elaborates a bit on a couple of common types of TOS agreements, and their legal validity.

It's only applicable if the situation were taken to court; but I'm not entirely sure that TOS which state that the buyer will forfeit any right to compensation, should the carrier mess up, would hold a lot of water in the first place. Since ATC is clinging so desperately to their TOS, even if were to be found lawful to hold a buyer responsible for not receiving his product in its described condition, there seems to be a question as to whether the TOS were actually "agreed to", in the eyes of a court. Just pointing out that the simple fact that there is a TOS page, doesn't automatically absolve ATC from their responsibility to deliver on their end of a deal. As with any legal matter, there is a lot which could easily be open to interpretation.

How you think ATC would feel if he ordered couple thousand in Electronics online, Carrier crushed the box, and the Retailer says we don't cover that your SOL.. Bet you any money he wont walk from that, hell be pissed and take to court. Its that simple, Until the product is in the hands of the customer and satisfied you as the seller are responsible for everything on DOAs or Damage

Would ATC's TOS even apply here, since it wasn't his animal? What are the TOS of the (imaginary/fictitious/unidentified ) breeder? Either way, the OP needs to be refunded immediately. But obviosly ATC is less concerned with his reputation and long term viability than he is $$. Take him to court.

The tort that was sent out died a week later?
This complicates things by atc he is responsible for the tort that perished in shipping ( my opinion) he took ownership according to him
And would also be responsible for the tort that died a week later as it came from his company with out quarantine
Wow what a mess

Originally Posted by mikepanzarella

The tort that was sent out died a week later?
This complicates things by atc he is responsible for the tort that perished in shipping ( my opinion) he took ownership according to him
And would also be responsible for the tort that died a week later as it came from his company with out quarantine
Wow what a mess

I have my doubts about the other Tort dying. After reading Andrew's feeble attempts to deflect blame, I just do not trust him. Anyone reading this thread
would be crazy to buy anything from him as he has proven to be shady. He may be a great seller when nothing goes wrong, but if anything happens, you are on your own.

They don't call them "UPS" (pronounced "OOPS") for nothing....NEVER use them for live animal shipments....TWICE they have almost killed snakes coming to me.....driver as well as supervisors claim NO responsibility....absolutely unacceptable.....

Originally Posted by mikepanzarella

The tort that was sent out died a week later?
This complicates things by atc he is responsible for the tort that perished in shipping ( my opinion) he took ownership according to him
And would also be responsible for the tort that died a week later as it came from his company with out quarantine
Wow what a mess

Hard to argue if ATC states a 5 day guarantee. Should they want anything more than that themselves. After all, ATC received the tortoise, therefore it was their property. They should not have passed on a tortoise if they thought it was sick.

Complicated. Yes.