EpitaphREI
New member
I've had the good fortune to be able to purchase several animals from David over the past few years, and can attest that he is a honest businessperson and he keeping of his animals is impeccable. I would be very hard pressed to believe that David is being anything other than honest in this case.
David also correctly handled the snake given that it was in blue, as the animal did not need to be stressed more than it already was from transit. The seller consistently states that David was able to see the animal through the container, but David also made it very clear that the lumps were almost undetectable visually, and would have likely been even more so when the snake was blue. There is also the fact that the lumps are most obvious when looking at the tail from the side, which would have been nigh impossible to see with the snake curled up in a transit container.
I agree with what Matt stated about the bumps not looking like a crimp or kink. Not only would there be more swelling with a recent injury, there would be some distortion of the scalation around the kinks, and the shape is wrong. Given that the lumps are on the dorsal side, there should be some crimping on the ventral side of the animal, but there is done. It rather looks like the lumps are bony protrusions from the top of the vertebrae, which would have likely been there since birth. A vet visit could likely easily confirm the origins of the injury with an x-ray.
In any case, it is the duty of the seller to honestly represent their animals. If the seller did not know about the defect, assuming it was there before David received the animal, then a full refund should be made as the fault was with the seller. Or, a partial refund from the price given that the animal was not perfect as advertised. If the seller does not wish to do this due to disbelief that the flaw was their responsibility, then a collaboration on a vet bill as as was already mentioned would be able to prove the origin of the injury.
Regardless, given the messages supplied by David I would say that the seller has done a very poor job of handling the situation. They have been quite rude and intolerant, leading me to personally believe that it would not be surprising if they had knowingly offloaded a defective animal for the price of a perfect one. Even if the seller was ignorant of the defect, their behavior and handling of this means I would never do business with him.
David, I hope things work out for you. Best of luck with this situation, and please keep us updated with any further correspondence with the seller.
David also correctly handled the snake given that it was in blue, as the animal did not need to be stressed more than it already was from transit. The seller consistently states that David was able to see the animal through the container, but David also made it very clear that the lumps were almost undetectable visually, and would have likely been even more so when the snake was blue. There is also the fact that the lumps are most obvious when looking at the tail from the side, which would have been nigh impossible to see with the snake curled up in a transit container.
I agree with what Matt stated about the bumps not looking like a crimp or kink. Not only would there be more swelling with a recent injury, there would be some distortion of the scalation around the kinks, and the shape is wrong. Given that the lumps are on the dorsal side, there should be some crimping on the ventral side of the animal, but there is done. It rather looks like the lumps are bony protrusions from the top of the vertebrae, which would have likely been there since birth. A vet visit could likely easily confirm the origins of the injury with an x-ray.
In any case, it is the duty of the seller to honestly represent their animals. If the seller did not know about the defect, assuming it was there before David received the animal, then a full refund should be made as the fault was with the seller. Or, a partial refund from the price given that the animal was not perfect as advertised. If the seller does not wish to do this due to disbelief that the flaw was their responsibility, then a collaboration on a vet bill as as was already mentioned would be able to prove the origin of the injury.
Regardless, given the messages supplied by David I would say that the seller has done a very poor job of handling the situation. They have been quite rude and intolerant, leading me to personally believe that it would not be surprising if they had knowingly offloaded a defective animal for the price of a perfect one. Even if the seller was ignorant of the defect, their behavior and handling of this means I would never do business with him.
David, I hope things work out for you. Best of luck with this situation, and please keep us updated with any further correspondence with the seller.
