• Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

  • IMPORTANT! PLEASE READ!! About the Google Adsense ads being displayed

    =====================
    Posted 08/15/2025
    =====================


    Yeah, I know. They are a pain in the butt. But they pay the bills to keep my server running. Just a fact of life, I am afraid.

    Want to get rid of them? Simple. Just become a Contributor level member or above and they will be gone. -> Please click HERE."

    Is that too much for me to ask of you to keep this site running? Well, sorry about that. I too wish I could get everything for free. But alas.....

    =====================
    Addendum: 01/10/2026
    =====================


    Google Adsense ad revenue for December, 2025 was just $30 over the cost of the lease for the server running this site. So, in effect, the money providing the incentive for me to continue running this site is coming SOLELY from the paid memberships and sponsorships here. Which honestly ain't much....

Bad Guy Drew at Underground Reptiles stole 784$

Sarcasm don't read so good - another emote failure by me apparently. There's a difference between enthusiasm and love and I am going more from what I see in the videos than what I hear. I did think the bit about the caiman lizards was relevant though as it shows their willingness to drop a project solely for money. I appreciate you putting the first quote into context for me.
 
Fair enough. I disagree, though, from a business perspective and as a person who both has a love for his animals and simultaneously must act in a strategic manner in order to have both coexist to serve my interests. I have sold off groups of a great many species I really loved working with over the years because funds could be better applied elsewhere (my own higher priorities) and because my attentions can only be divided so much.

I do not like the way this deal went down, but I still do not see the relevance of this course of discussion to the deal itself. The deal was business. The discussion is love. The sale of a caiman lizard group was for business strategy. Love is a divorced aspect that can be present or absent in any of these dealings, but the complaint is not about the presence of love or its absence in the seller's work with the animals he possesses. The complaint is regarding not being able to receive a full refund for an order of animals that was cancelled a short amount of time after order placement, during which the seller's actions may not have been extensive, and the ensuing debate on the matter of whether or not this (withholding a full refund) is legitimate or justified. Whether all of the love, some of the love, or none of the love is present does not matter with regards to the nature of the transaction-based dispute and the transaction-based dispute is likewise not evidence of absence of the unconnected love.
 
The 15% restocking fee "may apply" implies that it isn't always applied. Makes me wonder what would have to occur for the fee to be waived.

* Underground Reptiles has a no refund policy for all retail and wholesale orders. However we will offer store credit.

* In some instances, if a refund is granted, a 15% restocking fee may apply.
Click to expand...
 
My hunch would be discretion.

I received a refund from Underground Reptiles before in 2011, but the monetary total was significantly less (and the situation was such that they could not have completed my order). Might have been cool if I got an extra 15% for my time.
 
Mr Nick I just want to make sure I read your post right you were issued a refund for less than what you paid , because they couldn't fill your order ?
 
scosta56 said:
Mr Nick I just want to make sure I read your post right you were issued a refund for less than what you paid , because they couldn't fill your order ?
Click to expand...

No. I can see how that would be confusing based on how I worded that post.

I made an order (via email with payment, I think, via Paypal). I was notified by phone that the animal had died. I declined alternative offerings that were not what I was seeking at the time of that phone call. My payment was refunded in full because the seller would be unable to fulfill my order. The monetary total for my order was significantly less than monetary total for the order referenced by the OP. I considered the nature of the reversal that I experienced to be reasonable. My mild joke was meant to imply that, if the seller feels justified in charging the OP for what I must guess is pretty much opportunity cost, then it would have been nice to gain 15% of my payment for my time since that seems equally valid based on a concept of being robbed of time. Of course, I believe no such thing and felt I was only owed what I had paid (and I received what I was owed). It was just meant to highlight how absurd the idea of being owed for that might seem to some folks, myself included, as I have not really seen how the 15% has been justified.

So the order was $784. First there was the decision not to allow a refund at all (only credit). Then there was partial refund minus a 15%"restocking" fee. 15% of $784 is $117.60, yes? The time between placement and cancellation was said to be two hours, so that means the seller expected to charge the buyer $58.80 per hour for that time. Drew, the lucky guy, is getting paid somewhere near $58.80 per hour for what now must be implied to be the incredibly arduous undertaking of submitting and then cancelling the order? I am impressed by that salary.

I also do not quite understand the consideration of $784 dollar-for-dollar credit being retained without a penalty if there is a penalty for refunding payment. In either scenario, the same amount of "work" goes into submitting and cancelling an order after two hours, so the implementation of a penalty (aka "restocking" fee) seems by that measure to be an arbitrary assignment of value that does not actually exist. If one is making the case that a certain amount of work must be done to put things back that were never out of place and that this warrants a value deduction from the refund, so would that logically apply to any credit. In fact, since there is actual work performed in executing an order (pulling, packing, and shipping) versus submitting one, the seller would hypothetically be losing that value twice in the full-credit scenario. A puzzling disparity between these two scenario's value assessments.
 
I see now what you meant. Sorry about that. Can I ask a question to the experienced sellers.... Are there any fees associated with underground refunding the op money ? Like charge back fees or etc ?
 
I've had no recent dealings with Underground Reptiles so I'm not hear to praise them or criticize them but lets look at the facts here for a second.

1. The OP made a bad guy thread where he essentially calls one of UG's employees a thief in the title because he followed his employer's store policy. The employee probably does not have the authority to use personal discretion but his name is used in the title of this thread....pretty sleazy and libelous in my opinion.

2. I personally don't agree with charging a restocking fee after such a small amount of time but Underground Reptile's TOS are not that different than many other large reptile businesses. They may enforce their TOS more than some but they also have overhead that many breeders don't have and more to lose (i.e. payroll, rent, etc.)

2. There has been a bunch of discussion about UG being motivated by profit...they are a business. Underground Reptiles is a retail "brick and mortar" pet store that has managed to stay in business for 20 years despite being right around the corner from another successful reptile store.

3. The owner of Underground Reptiles states that he reached out to the OP and would be willing to work with him to make him happy and keep his business. The OP made one "hit and run" post in this thread and has not returned.

Like several BOI threads recently, the OP comes off looking worse than the target of the Bad Guy thread from my perspective.
 
gila7150 said:
2. I personally don't agree with charging a restocking fee after such a small amount of time but Underground Reptile's TOS are not that different than many other large reptile businesses. They may enforce their TOS more than some but they also have overhead that many breeders don't have and more to lose (i.e. payroll, rent, etc.)
Click to expand...

Overhead is generally a fixed cost. Underground has to pay the rent regardless if they sell one critter or 500 in a particular time period.
So the implication here is that there is less flexibility because of fixed expenses, not because of the particulars of a situation.
I've said it before and I'll probably say it again, this thread will show prospective customers how Underground handles issues, and so benefits both the prospective purchaser and Underground because customers who prefer more flexibility will go elsewhere.
 
I'm sorry but this comes across as a complete joke. How can they justify a "restocking" fee for something that was never picked up/sent out.

If i went into a shop and asked them to put a dress or something on a layaway and later phoned to say actually I don't want it. Would you expect them to charge me for a dress on layaway? Or to say thats fine ma'am but its going to cost you 15% of the dress price as it was off our sales floor and then only offer me store credit?

What a farce. They can hide behind their TOS all they like but truly shows just what kind of business people they are.
 
scosta56 said:
Are there any fees associated with underground refunding the op money ? Like charge back fees or etc ?
Click to expand...
No, merchant processors do not charge fees on refunds. They do charge fees if you refuse to issue a refund and the cardholder initiates a chargeback, especially if the merchandise ordered was not shipped. Also, having a large number of chargebacks means you typically pay higher credit card processing fees than merchants who have few or none.
 
lilnightmare said:
If i went into a shop and asked them to put a dress or something on a layaway and later phoned to say actually I don't want it. Would you expect them to charge me for a dress on layaway? Or to say thats fine ma'am but its going to cost you 15% of the dress price as it was off our sales floor and then only offer me store credit?
Click to expand...
Layaways and payment plans that can span several months are often handled differently depending on sale terms, especially in the herp world. Nonrefundable deposits are standard, as the seller needs to feed and care for the animal until all of the payments have been made.
 
bcr229 said:
Layaways and payment plans that can span several months are often handled differently depending on sale terms, especially in the herp world. Nonrefundable deposits are standard, as the seller needs to feed and care for the animal until all of the payments have been made.
Click to expand...

Ah see if they had taken a non-refundable deposit (which I do btw as it deters timewasters) then fair enough but a restocking fee for things that had never left stock in the first place is a joke.

It may just be words to some but if I agree to a nonrefundable deposit that is one thing. To have a "restocking" fee slapped on me for animals that were never in my possession? Yeah not a chance in hell.


Maybe UGR should change their restocking fee to a non-refundable deposit. That way there is no confusion. If you back out of a deal you lose the deposit. End of story.
 
I agree with natasha that UG should change his TOS for a non-refundable deposit.
any restocking fees should be reserved ONLY when the order has physicly shipped out and was returned..
OR
if the OP would have picked up his animals to ligthning fast flip them (i'm sure he would tell potential customers that he has no clue about their health since he's only had them for 10 mins) then after the show decided to return all the animals that did not sell..

from all the info i have read here, i don t agree with the restocking fees but UG seems to have tried finding a resolution.. i wouldn t however deal with the OP since i'm not sure i would know the real deal about the animal he is selling..
 
I also have no issue with the use of nonrefundable deposits (applied fairly when applied). It cuts out time-wasters in some cases. In addition, I have also offered them to sellers as shows of good faith on occasion. A restocking fee can be reasonable if restocking has to be performed. If there is no substantial restocking activity, then charging a restocking fee may be perceived as dishonest.
 
yeloowtang said:
I agree with natasha that UG should change his TOS for a non-refundable deposit.
any restocking fees should be reserved ONLY when the order has physicly shipped out and was returned..
OR
if the OP would have picked up his animals to ligthning fast flip them (i'm sure he would tell potential customers that he has no clue about their health since he's only had them for 10 mins) then after the show decided to return all the animals that did not sell..

from all the info i have read here, i don t agree with the restocking fees but UG seems to have tried finding a resolution.. i wouldn t however deal with the OP since i'm not sure i would know the real deal about the animal he is selling..
Click to expand...

Undergrounds attempt at a solution was offering his money back minus a 15 percent
charge. Then once he found out a chargeback was filed he offered to settle for $50.00 . Just shamefull
 
I don't agree for one second with the way he does business, i simply pointed out that he was trying to find a resolution and if both parties would talk it over, this BOI could have been avoided..

we may never know all of the actual story here.. if no charges were supposed to be charged on his CC before he got there because he wanted to see and switch animals for a final total then the card shouldn t have been charged for that total..

did they actually do any work with his chosen animals ? removed and boxed up ? and even IF UG did waist time, that retsocking fee has no place here.. that's why a non-refundable deposit is better..

i understand both sides here...

OP has the right to change his mind, be it that he found a better deal, or just really couldn t make it !!
UG for (IF)taking the time to get his animals put asside and ready, then having the guy back out...imagin having to deal with a bunch of people like this all the time..
that's why a deposit for serious buyers is a good idea... you back out then you know what to expect..

I 've only been to 2 reptile shows in all the years in the hobby, and i must say that this post leaves me with a bad view on sellers i don't know.. to see sellers picking up a bunch of animals simply to have a nice table to show up with !!!
will they be honest and tell potential buyers:
I didn't breed them,
I didn't feed them,
I'm not sure about there health,
I just picked them up before the show to flip them for a quick $$$

to me that's no better then UG wanting bogus restocking fees

like others have said, no winners in this post, both of them look bad.. :(
 
Really?

If a vendor who had my credit card number charged and processed a fee to my card before my express agreement or before I receive the goods in the amount of the charge, then I would treat and punish that person as a thief. If the person who took the initial order can't afford to set the goods aside before a show, then that person shouldn't have agreed to attempt to fill the order at all. That is what it means to be a business person and not a simple thief. I think the real lesson here is that one should not be willing to give one's credit card number to someone who may or may not be be a low, dirty thief.

I am not a business owner in this industry, but in every other industry I've worked, the actions taken by the company would be considered criminally unacceptable. Charging money to try and weed out time wasters? You've got to be kidding me. Merchants and vendors don't have the luxury of offending potential customers and those who make a habit of doing so rarely stay in business for very long. What a vile, shameless, putrid way to do business. Disgusting.
 
Back
Top