Todd left me room to play and you cant hate me for wanting to make a few bucks but I sold it for 175 and gave todd all of the money.
My question had nothing to do with you making money - the selling price was irrelevant, except for the fact that YOU made the decision to take a lower offer. You had the snake, you did the negotiation, you took the money, you turned over possession of the snake - all those things add up to YOU being the seller.
The title clearly states Todd Tindol and amys screenshots confirm she knew well ahead of time it is Todd Tindols snake
Yup,
you were selling Todd's snake. As the seller, you have responsibility for the transaction.
-- "middlemen" are just as liable as the breeder IMHO. Whoever makes the sale is the one responsible for the transaction......if Sean is the one who marketed the snake and took the money for it, he's the one who should be trying to figure out how to make things right with amy, and working things out to make things right with him and Todd separately
Thank you - my point exactly. (hope you don't mind that I chopped your post, it was solely for the purpose of saving space, not changing the apparent meaning of your words)
I dont see why I should give her my money since I clearly stated its a "wholesale animal" without a guarantee and I dont want the boa since I dont work with boas.
So it isn't the fact that it was Todd's snake that is causing the problem?? Or that you don't feel the snake was misrepresented? It's because it was a "wholesale animal" (not a wholesale price, but that is a different matter...one that I have no interest in debating). You're all over the place on this one - you should pick a story and stick to it.
However, upon reflection, I'm curious as to why you seemed so firm in stating that you don't believe I deserve a refund, since this transaction is between myself and Todd.
Because the transaction was between you and Sean?
However, I feel that finding that the snake is genetically misinterpreted should be the responsibility of the seller.
Additionally, I don't understand why Sean is acting as Todd's representative again. I started this thread on Todd Tindol, and I have stated that I do not hold Sean accountable for the deal.
I understand that Todd was the owner of the snake; however, as this whole post is dedicated to repeating, Sean was the seller...UNLESS there is, in fact, a legitimate business relationship linking the two of them.
I don't know Todd, and I'm certainly not trying to protect him with these comments...but you did business with Sean. At this point, it doesn't even matter if you agree with me - one of the timeless explanations made on the BOI is that
it's how a seller responds to a problem that defines him as a good guy (or bad). Sean is showing, once again, how he does things; and everybody is seeing it. The reason he's involved in this thread is because he knows he's on display...his goal is to make people believe that this falls in somebody else's lap so it doesn't reflect on him.
