"BEARDED PETS" ... *Inquiry/BUYER BEWARE!!*

~ Has ANYONE actually EVER followed up, and ACTUALLY filed a complaint with IFCC??

TO ALL WHO HAVE COMPLAINED:
~ Can we have proof of your IFCC responses sent to KS posted here, and KS's response to that in return?

I appreciate what you guys are saying here and all ... that nothing is done even with proof. It sounds like a well-versed scenario, HOWEVER, if KS are not taking the responsibility of eliminating con-artists on their site even with the FBI's feedback, then this is a matter we should look at VERY seriously.
I am not sure if anyone has actually followed it up (as KS claims).

Please post your proof of IFCC's response to your complaint, and KS' response to the incident RIGHT HERE, for us to have real evidence of that "accomplice" and "coddling criminals" is a possibility open to KS.

This reminds me of when someone talks of opening 'a can of worms'... maybe we shall find we have a better position and angle to talk to the FBI branch on this one...

If you take away the tools of a criminal, he will have a hard time to perform.... it is a start for the end of "Bearded Pets" and their likes on what otherwise is a great site to buy & sell.

Has anyone heard of or visited "www.herpvenue.com"?
They seem new and have quite a nice format - any feedback on that site, since I only just discovered them last week?
Possible alternative to KS??

On another note: it is obvious that "Bearded Pets" and others could and will just as easily come right back again with new identities and supposed locations. So what about Service Providers? Could they be asked to 'ban' accounts from named individuals? Wouldn't work - the criminals would just go to an internet cafe, or use a friend's PC etc... So it is a definite vicious circle which leaves only one answer:
This FBI branch (IFCC) should insist on all these vendor sites of live animals that every customer account has to be strictly regulated: 3 complaints of stolen money (with proof) and you're banned for life.
Paying or non-paying sites, site owners MUST take responsibility and a firm stand. Afterall, they are in the position to call the shots in their terms and conditions, so why do they not do so without forcing the visitors to their site to go fight for something that the site owner CAN, AND SHOULD, easily resolve!

Animal-cons NEED the popular selling sites to target their victims.

Unfortunately, vending sites like KS (and few other 'big' names) say "we only do this as a hobby".

Your hobby time and creativity is much appreciated: BUT, when your site lures criminals, and involves animals, this cannot be used as an EXCUSE not to do anything at all!
(I am not saying they do, just that it is not a viable excuse to get out of really taking the initiative to do something about it).

There HAS to be some sort of regulation for all animal vending sites to adhere to: such as if 3 proven reports of (even attempted) criminal activity are sent in about one of YOUR 'customers' or 'advertisers' on YOUR site, that person must be BANNED FOR LIFE! Site owners must be held responsible for dealing with a situation, NOT encouraging it by taking a 'I'm-a-hobbyist,-therefore-not-entirely-concerned-or-responsible-about-what-you-do-on-my-site' attitude.
And then tell you to go ask everyone else to fight for your cause!!

WHAT kind of (hobbyist) EXCUSE is that to hide behind, when you are responsible for opening up an enormous playground for animals and criminals to come together???

If you are a bar owner selling alcohol, and an underage person drinks on your premises, whether you know about it or not, YOU RISK HAVING YOUR LICENSE REVOKED!!
It is purely a responsibility that you MUST take on when you know that that risk is there. So, why are sites that bring animals and criminals together allowed to sit back and say they are just hobbists, with an air of 'you should be grateful for having their site to play on in the first place'?!!

To just be able to shrug off any responsibility is CRIMINAL itself! And worse still, is to make your visitors go fight it out somewhere else!!

Opening a public site for exchange of money and LIVE ANIMALS should involve a stricter procedure. If a live-animal site was to have a buyer/seller 'verified' program similar to PayPal, then that would discourage many con-artists, and give more confidence to buyers. I reckon if anyone was to do such a site, I am willing to bet that the reptile community would forget the KS-type sites overnight.

Quite a few points raised here, so hoping for feedback on the various topics:

~ Your filed complaints to IFCC ...(POST HERE)
~ Your responces from KS on the IFCC feedback ...(POST HERE)

~ Has anyone visited 'herpvenue.com' - could it be a new KS alternative?

~ A proposal for a new 'verified' platform to trade in live animals. Any interest? Any sponsors? Any programmers interested?!! I vote for "PetPal"!!!


Thanks!

Allison Mason

Allison:

To address your last post:

I think an alternate vending site is an excellent idea.

You cannot, however, compare what is happening with bartenders serving liquor. The so called 'dramshop' rules are statutory, the bar owners make sure they are behaving in a responsible manner because the law states what they must do.

As far as 'shrugging off responsibility' being criminal, it is not. Crimes are activities that are forbidden by statute; if the activities outlined are against statute the transgressors are more easily gotten. There are many people who are irresponsible slimy scumbags and who do not face up to their responsibilities but until they cross the line and do something illegal, they are not criminal.

Site owners have a tightrope to walk on. A site owner cannot easily just take whole bunches of people he does not care for and 'ban someone for life' for business practices he does not agree with (unless he is very sure of his facts) because that someone may in turn drag the owner into court for libel. If a site owner acts as judge and jury, he has responsibility for what he does and while the site may be scumbag-free, the site owner will assuredly not be lawsuit free.

The closest site to being perfect in this respect is right here on Fauna: the BOI, protected by First Amendment free speech rights, allows us to post our experiences with scumbags and the rest of us can read these experiences and decide whether or not we want to deal with such questionable people.

I sympathize with your feelings and with the experiences of everyone who has been ripped off by a shady deal; I am just pointing out that getting rid of these creeps is MUCH more difficult than it seems.

Thanks for your response, Lucille.

I agree with you, and please do not get me wrong: I am not stating any laws for I am no lawyer.

In using the example of a bar owner, I was merely trying to conjure a scenario comparable to the kind of responsilbility and the seriousness of what a website must recognise when open/vulnerable to the business of criminals and especially for being directly involved with providing a market place for live animals.

Quoting myself:
"To just be able to shrug off any responsibility is CRIMINAL itself! And worse still, is to make your visitors go fight it out somewhere else!!"

Perhaps open to misunderstanding: using the word "criminal" here was a figure of speech, not stating any facts or laws. Like if I were to call a situation "INSANE" for example, it does not mean that the men in white coats need to be called out! If it reads wrongly, I take it back.

I am not accusing anyone on this thread for anything, other than "Bearded Pets" for copying a huge part of the opening paragraphs of my classifed ad. Their small-mindedness is not worth my time in arguing with them about it. But trying to find a way to stop them from posting ads on KS, such as KS suggested to do, is a start.

I do not know how these con-artists can be stopped long-term.

I am hoping to initiate suggestions of standards for site owners who provide a platform for the selling and buying of live animals.
Ways that filter out the good from the bad eggs in doing business on their sites (a verification process?); Terms & Conditions that would suspend further activity if someone is complained about by someone else who has proof of (even attempted) illegal activity until further investigation.
And if the person gets 3 similar complaints, then they are banned from the site when proven to be dishonest. Along the lines of "House Rules" so to speak.
This may discourage potential scammers, especially those with records, from trying to pull further fast ones on innocent people.

The reptile industry is full of scammers infiltrating a very easy route to stealing and deceiving.
It appears that so many known criminals are repeatedly doing business and advertising their ficticious animals because they are simply allowed to get away with it on a number of sites.
Even when they are KNOWN criminals (with lots of customers with proof)!

I know what you are saying (and I agree) about the site owner being susceptible to libel.
And I hope to learn more about this.
Surely a site owner's T&Cs carry weight as to the amount of discretion they can execute if given reasonable proof?

EBay, for example, has a right to suspend accounts of 'non-paying bidders' etc. I am not going into the legal aspects of what they do, but what I don't understand and I am trying to point out is that a site surely is allowed to make its "House Rules" and a similar thing could be done whereby 3 complaints against a seller of animals can suspend their right to sell on the site until they justify their actions in a deal, etc...

Being "banned for life" would be a case that the site owner would execute, based on feedback from IFCC for example.

I am merely discussing, not pronouncing anything set in concrete.
All comments are welcomed.

Thanks,

Allison Mason

Allison I sure agree with your points that scammers need to be put out of business.
I am just a person with several pet reptiles and no expertise at all; I would think that if we wanted to get an idea of exactly how hard that is to do, we could welcome and request input from Webslave and/or the mods. They have been around longer, know more, and have seen this stuff far longer than most people. And, the BOI is living proof that we in the reptile world can fight the scammers back in a successful way.

I am glad that I was told about this site. I saw an ad from these guys on a site and e-mailed them about the snakes. A breeder friend of mine suggested that I check them out here. Boy, am I glad that she suggested it! The only response I got from bearded pets was disgutstingly shady. They were quick to respond, but vague and generalized in their "answers"- which amounted to not being answers at all. Being very new to the hobby, I am trying to learn as much as I can before I buy something new. Having to dodge people/businesses that are out to rook me is frustrating. Thanks everyone who posted here, you helped me out immensely!!!!!!

I breathe an immense sigh of relief to know that this thread, and others on "BEARDED PETS" here on the BOI, has saved another person from falling prey to these idiots.

"Well Done!" for coming here, ...and do the same for others - pass on the BOI link for future verfification, before doing business with shady or new sellers.

Funny to hear you got such a quick answer from them!!!
I wrote a list of questions, and they couldn't answer ONE!
I never received a single response .... and it did not surprise me as I asked questions that only an experienced Aldabra tortoise keeper would know the answers to. And answers that would also come from actually HAVING the animals!!

THEY KNOW NOTHING ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE SELLING, unless it comes from someone else's website or copied from someone else's classified ad. And if they post a picture, it is more than likely to be someone else's too!!!!

You have made the best start to your search just by discovering the BOI!

All the best in your new hobby...

the fact remains the KS cannot do anything about it. It's not their job to verify copyright infringement or criminal activity. They did give you the advice you need, report it to the IFCC, it's their job. Report the facts without the passion, which I understand also, but they need the facts and links to all the websites where you feel that these people have infringed copyrights, whether in part or in whole. If during the course of the investigation the IFCC feels there is a strong enough case they can then take further action. If there is other criminal activity involved they can take action against that also. Internet fraud is rampant and when violaters are caught they face criminal prosecution and often bans from even using or touching a computer. But they have to be reported to the proper authorities.

When you find activities of this nature exposing it here is an excellent start to a solution, you may find others who have had similar experiences. Your next step is to advise any others to do as you should have done and report it to the IFCC with a link to the reporting site.

Originally posted by BigTattoo
the fact remains the KS cannot do anything about it. It's not their job to verify copyright infringement or criminal activity.

This, IMHO, is just a cop-out. Again, it's the 3 monkey approach. If I close my eyes, ears and mouth...

KS can do plenty. They can review the facts and close BPs account. Instead, they go out of their way to dismiss and hide sites like this one. Why?

Don't underestimate the power of influence and peer pressure.

Dave,

I agree with you that it's not the job of any of the internet sites to verify criminal activity. In fact most sites (look at EBay for example) have a disclosure clause where they clearly state it is left to the buyer to inquire about the accuracy and legality of the things posted for sale.

Not taking action over something when we have the possibility to do so, is an action in itself. I'm allowing that individual or company to continue doing business in my "store". And you know what? It gets even worse, because I'm being paid in the process!

Let us suppose for example that I live in a small town and a person that frequents my store has committed a well-documented offense. Let us also suppose I keep my mouth shut and do nothing about it because after all he still buys a few things at my store. How will that reflect on my business? How would other potential or actual "clients" in the community react once they know I'm allowing this to happen in my store?

In MHO the existence of this thread answers those two questions.

Take care!

Jay you are unfortunately incorrect; it exposes a site owner to quite a bit of legal liability to unilaterally dismiss some vendors because of reputation. They may sue on libel and other charges. And in this day and age it can easily cost a huge amount of money to defend against a legal claim.