RJK890
Lone Wolf
This thread is starting to seem more like the spillover from the facebook drama then it is an "info" thread at this point.
The animal had old scars, and some nose rub.
Should have been disclosed, however it also should have been noticed when purchasing the animal in person.
It was also in a shed cycle, and maybe dehydrated at the time of purchase.
Again, should have been noticed at the time of purchase, and it was.
You said you were okay with that issue.
The holes in the lip also should have been disclosed, or noticed at the time of purchase. However, I can see either party overlooking that issue.
(If that issue was a deal breaker for you, she may not have dealt with it properly.)
Kelly has said that she was not aware of the holes in the lip.
Samantha either exposed a complete lie, or was mistaken about the lip being treated with neosporin, and it was actually the old scars that were being treated.
That could go either way, but did/does look bad for Kelly.
As far as the animal weighing 200g at 13 months old, that is irrelevant.
If you knew the animal was a yearling, and could obviously tell what weight range it was in when you inspected it, that was apparently not an issue or you would have declined the purchase.
The snake does not look malnourished in the second pic, in post #1.
The "Warning: Info" has been posted, and does appear to be justified.
Kelly has not handled this thread in a way that would make anyone give her the benefit of any doubt, other then the fact that she may or may not have offered to refund or exchange ?
Now it appears that Y'all are just going back and forth posting antagonistic and childish attacks here, as well as on FB and then copy and pasting the responses here in order to make the op look the fool.
Both, (or all three,) parties are starting to look like people to avoid, IMO.

The animal had old scars, and some nose rub.
Should have been disclosed, however it also should have been noticed when purchasing the animal in person.
It was also in a shed cycle, and maybe dehydrated at the time of purchase.
Again, should have been noticed at the time of purchase, and it was.
You said you were okay with that issue.
The holes in the lip also should have been disclosed, or noticed at the time of purchase. However, I can see either party overlooking that issue.
(If that issue was a deal breaker for you, she may not have dealt with it properly.)
Kelly has said that she was not aware of the holes in the lip.
Samantha either exposed a complete lie, or was mistaken about the lip being treated with neosporin, and it was actually the old scars that were being treated.
That could go either way, but did/does look bad for Kelly.
As far as the animal weighing 200g at 13 months old, that is irrelevant.
If you knew the animal was a yearling, and could obviously tell what weight range it was in when you inspected it, that was apparently not an issue or you would have declined the purchase.
The snake does not look malnourished in the second pic, in post #1.
The "Warning: Info" has been posted, and does appear to be justified.
Kelly has not handled this thread in a way that would make anyone give her the benefit of any doubt, other then the fact that she may or may not have offered to refund or exchange ?
Now it appears that Y'all are just going back and forth posting antagonistic and childish attacks here, as well as on FB and then copy and pasting the responses here in order to make the op look the fool.
Both, (or all three,) parties are starting to look like people to avoid, IMO.

