Mike Matson of Mike's Phat Frog is a scammer !!

That's what I was advised by legal aid to respond. I'm not with them so I can not debate on legal technicality with you, but thank you for your input Lucille I appreciate it.

Pathetic how neither Mike, or Rick, care for the welfare of these frogs. Both willing to allow them to perish enclosed in a box! My heart breaks, at the possible fate of these poor critters, and it angers me as well!

That said, I have not, yet, seen any indication that Mike gained possession of animals, that he never had any intentions of paying for, nor any indication that he blew Rick off by a lack of communication.

I have also not, yet, seen any proof that this situation makes Mike a scammer.
Mike has offered the animals back if Rick cannot hold out, a little longer, for payment. Mike also offered, along with that, to pay for shipping and for the frogs that had died while in his care. Mike has, also, maintained communication when contacted. Things that a scammer would not do.

If what Mike says is true, and I have no reason (at this time) to believe it isn't, Mike did not foresee, at time of agreement, that he was going to, suddenly, lose $10,000 worth of tadpoles &/or froglets. Am sure he did not want that to happen either.
It appears that he counted on the income, from those lost tadpoles/froglets, to pay Rick.

Without that income, Mike appeared to, still, wish to pay Rick but had to come up with another method in order to pay. A method that, despite what is expected, may not occur in the time frame that either party wishes/thinks it would/will.

Unless Mike gets a loan, which I have doubts that he could, Rick only has two choices:
1. Accept the frogs back along with some cash.
2. Give Mike more time to come up with the funds by his either selling some current breeding stock &/or selling youngsters once they are old/big enough.
After all, blood cannot be squeezed from a turnip.
However, this requires cooperation and maturity.

...

I'm not going to put my multi thousand dollar gecko colony at risk by accepting high probability infected frogs which were healthy when I sent them out ( AS STATED BY MIKE )and weren't said to have any type of infection until 3 weeks AFTER their arrival which I no longer have enclosures for because he just decided to back out of a deal.
Deb , that was a cheap shot you took at me with the first statement you decide to make , but unfortunately the care for the safety and well being of my animals at home is precisely why I won't take those frogs back. You definitely seem to have a bias, but please don't let that skew you your perception of what's really going on here. I'm obviously not the only one who sees it this way, but thanks for your input.

If he in fact sold his enclosures and bought gecko enclosures it would be irresponsible to take back 15+ frogs if he could not house them properly so yes i agree it was a cheap shot

Originally Posted by Pasodama

Unless Mike gets a loan, which I have doubts that he could, Rick only has two choices:
1. Accept the frogs back along with some cash.
2. Give Mike more time to come up with the funds by his either selling some current breeding stock &/or selling youngsters once they are old/big enough.
After all, blood cannot be squeezed from a turnip.
However, this requires cooperation and maturity.

...

Originally Posted by 312Herps

I'm not going to put my multi thousand dollar gecko colony at risk by accepting high probability infected frogs which were healthy when I sent them out ( AS STATED BY MIKE )and weren't said to have any type of infection until 3 weeks AFTER their arrival which I no longer have enclosures for because he just decided to back out of a deal.
Deb , that was a cheap shot you took at me with the first statement you decide to make , but unfortunately the care for the safety and well being of my animals at home is precisely why I won't take those frogs back. You definitely seem to have a bias, but please don't let that skew you your perception of what's really going on here. I'm obviously not the only one who sees it this way, but thanks for your input.

That was not directed AT you.
Obviously, since you won't accept them (and I am not say you HAVE to), Mike shouldn't send them.
I do understand why you do not wish to have them returned.
It just truly upsets me when there is a possible jeopardy to the frogs' welfare. Perhaps lending to my coming off too strong, or with a poor choice in wording, in my initial paragraph.

To be clear, I have no bias because I do not know Mike, nor have I ever done business with him, nor have I ever communicated with him. Actually, ptetty much the same goes with you.

What a pathetic excuse. Even if there was a likelihood of frogs transmitting a bacterial infection to geckos (which there isn't), the frogs could easily be quarantined. Even if enclosures have been filled or sold, a quick trip to Walmart and anyone can have a lot of gladware or Rubbermaid containers for very little money. There were problems on both ends, but Rick comes off looking much worse in my eyes after seeing how both parties have conducted themselves here.

So because mike backed out Rick should have to go to a local store fork out even more money to care for frogs he already babied on being sold... Makes do much sense... You know since Mike's problems are some good ricks Responsibility's

He already banked on being sold*** makes so much sense** hate this phone sometimes

Wanted to add that the sending, of the frogs, could be prevented though.
However, that depends on Mike and You.