Kelly Reggie - Caught in a SCAM!

we shall see. for KCRDs sake, I hope this person climbs back under the rock he came out of, but if he decides to pursue, some litigation he may have more to gain than loose.

Their are no criminal liabilities here, and his past performances would not come into the picture if he files a summons in small claims court in his state.
He is out the money, the snakes, and the shipping fee. Thats all thats needed. He has the stopped payment money orders, he has receipt for the shipping, and he more than likely has acknowledgent that the shipment was accepted by KCRD. So in his eyes as Ive stated before , he is out $ 2,000. or possibly more. I am just bringing this to your attention as a possibility. These are the facts, everything else is of no consequence, if its taken to court. Whether you like the scenerio or not, whether he is a scam artist or not, bears no relevance to the evidence he has in his possession to move forward with some litigation. I loathe these kinds of people, who get attracted to this industry . KCRD should never have gotten involved with this bait and hook character in the first place.

And Jason has some things to keep in mind. But with regard to this one statement by you:

These are the facts, everything else is of no consequence, if its taken to court. Whether you like the scenerio or not, whether he is a scam artist or not, bears no relevance to the evidence he has in his possession to move forward with some litigation.

While it is possible that the scammer could move forward as you say, your statement that I highlighted above, about "other things being of no consequence if taken to court" ........ that is only your opinion, and one which many legal minds will disagree with aggressively. It may be of no consequence to his ability to file a complaint, but it is of every consequence if this were to ever get any serious consideration in court. Frankly, even with money to pursue this, the "scammer", and their case, would be shredded in deposition, if it even went that far. I defer back to Dan's advice.

Jerry,

You are completely overlooking the fact the guy knowingly and willingly committed fraud in this transaction with KCRD. Which IS a criminal offense. And yes the fact he did not ship when agreed upon will matter in small claims court, the fact he tried to force the deal even after he was told the deal was off will matter as will the fact that what he did ship was grossly misrepresented. WHICH IS FRAUD. Even in small claims court the guy would not have a chance.

To say fraud is not a crime is completely wrong. Ask the 1000's of people behind bars for fraud about that.

Jerry,
One last scenario which you raise, and an answer for those who may not have already surmised such: the ability of the scammer to file a harassing claim for $2K in small claims court. Jason doesn't want to invest money in attorneys if not needed. But if such a claim were filed, he would have to get one convenient to where the suit was filed. Could all be done by phone and email. But, he would already have the email communications, and the certified mail receipt, etc., to provide the attorney. He could also easily link the attorney to webpages explaining this type of scam with ball pythons, so that the attorney could educate him-or-her-self. The attorney would be glad for all. It would also be the basis for a counter-claim, to include all fees, should the scammer pursue the case. At that point, the motivation for the scammer falls apart, for they realize that the likelihood of success is nil, while the likelihood of increased costs is great. As Sammy points out, they are the last ones to want a light shone on this. I am still wondering, given all the cards as they exist, how you think Jason should proceed, as you have taken issue with the words and recommendations of others, and mentioned things that concern you. OK. What's the next play?

were not intended to start a war of some sort. What I am saying is that if it goes to small claims court in the state that this scammer is in, and a summons is issued to KCRD then it will have to be answered. Whether their would be a depostion, or other legal manuverings, is pure speculation.

I dont know how far KCRD would have to go, nor how much he would have to spend if the above situation occurred.
SHRAP, i understand exactly what you said in your previous post, but the judge in a civil matter would only be interested in proof. As ive indicated, he has some credible evidence, whether you like it or not, or whether you and I know he may be a scammer.

CHAMCO, the information that I provided is not my opinion. I am very familiar with the court system, and can assure you, that their would be no deposition between 2 parties in 2 different states. Its a simple civil small claims court matter . Whether KCRD show up if a summons is served, is another matter. If KCRD hires an attorney in the state of issuance, then that to is another matter, but it can get expensive. So when I say, it is of no consequence if its taken to court, what I am saying is that the fact that he may be a thief has no relationship to money orders that have been stopped, snakes that are no longer in his possession, shipping bills to the KCRD. Any attorney that has any weight in the court system, is going to capitalize on those facts.......and whether you agree with me or not. They are facts admissable in court.. Trying to proove someone is a scammer, would never hold up as an excuse.

sorry, I did not read your post when I responded.
No one knows how this is going to end up. But let me say this much. If this creep wanted to , in order to strengthen his position, threaten KCRD with writing a letter to the bank that the money orders were stopped on and complaining about some type of collusion between him and his wife in sending money orders , then stopping them. I am concerned about this !

I am also concerned that this creep has not contacted KCRD since this episode. Unless I am wrong, he may very well be planning some kind of litigation. I am concerned about this as well.

I have no intentions or illusions about desperate people doing desperate things. Ive dealt with people like this in the past, and when they smell money, they will take the least traveled road to attempt to get what they want. Litigation is not so far fetched of an idea. So I will wait and see if KCRD provides any additional information , as we move forward. Regards,

Jerry,

You seem to be looking at only half the facts. You seem to be completely ignoring the emails, the contents of the emails, the dates of the emails and the fact that what he did ship was not what was agreed upon or even wanted since by the time he did ship he was already informed the deal was off.

Those are the other half of the facts. The ones that would easily prove the sellers claims to be moot and only lead to criminal charges against the seller because at this point you file them with the prosecutor since you already have a lawyer involved. Then counter sue for all expenses. And none of this is based on anything but the current situation. It has nothing to do with the past.

please understand that the facts that you speak about may or may not be relevant. On one side you have KCRD with emails, that could easily be considered self serving by a good attorney. On the other side of this coin, you have what Ive already indicated. Big difference. If you want to consider that they would both have equal weight in a court of law, then KCRD is going to be in trouble. The burden of proof of sending the snakes has already been established. The monies have been mysteriously stopped by his wife, who just happens to work at the same bank that the money orders were issued at. And finally, the receipt showing that the snakes were in fact shipped.

One other evil thought, Its very conceviable that this thief could easily say that the snakes that KCRD showed are NOT the snakes that were sent. So I understand exactly your concern, but emails, and postal receipts just dont provide a financial loss that this character may claim. I hope you understand that. Regards,

Points taken Jerry, and I do see what you are saying. I just feel there is plenty of evidence to thwart any attempts by the seller to pursue this in court. Because emails are admissible evidence in court and will hold just as much credence as what the seller can provide. Even more so in this case. I know I would feel very optimistic if it was me in KCRD's shoes. In fact I would look forward to it with glee.

Agreed Sammy. And Jason does not have to prove that the other person is a scammer. He only has to show that the animals were not accurately represented (easy to do with just minimal documentation), but more importantly, that he not only called off the deal before they were shipped, but then took definitive steps to either return them, or pay the estimated value of what he received, which BTW, is not the same as what he ordered and to which we all agree. Jason's documenting of how he tried to fairly remedy the situation is all that he has to show, and its hard to find fault with an immediate return. No judge in the world is going to find fault with Jason's attempts to find immediate and fair remedies. All this other speculation just doesn't matter. What I still can't find out is the opinion of "what should he now do" other than what has been advised. Dan gave some very sound advice earlier in the thread. To it was added to send it by the most documented legal means possible, short of designated courier. It was then said by Jerry that this would not fix or address other problems, or put as best I recall, that it would not prove certain things or address certain problems. OK Jerry, what actions would prove or solve? What is he to do at this point that he hasn't already done, in order to be as prepared as he can be for things highly unlikely to happen? Or maybe you are saying that his actions left him more exposed in some ways. I think most of us feel that Jason acted exactly right, and that all he can do is minimize the opportunity for the scammer to cause any additional grief to him, and recommended some simple things. I don't think anyone said "do this and you have no additional reason for concern". We did say that "this is what you should do to minimize your continued risk". And that may be as good as it gets right now. What I haven't seen is you Jerry recommend what he should have done differently, or should do from this point forward, in the exceptions that you took to the recommendations of others. Its not about disagreeing, but rather real curiosity. Just want to know what the additional advice is, if there is a basis for you taking exception, in order to learn from it.