• 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....

Kelly Reggie - Caught in a SCAM!

Well,

we shall see. for KCRDs sake, I hope this person climbs back under the rock he came out of, but if he decides to pursue, some litigation he may have more to gain than loose.

Their are no criminal liabilities here, and his past performances would not come into the picture if he files a summons in small claims court in his state.
He is out the money, the snakes, and the shipping fee. Thats all thats needed. He has the stopped payment money orders, he has receipt for the shipping, and he more than likely has acknowledgent that the shipment was accepted by KCRD. So in his eyes as Ive stated before , he is out $ 2,000. or possibly more. I am just bringing this to your attention as a possibility. These are the facts, everything else is of no consequence, if its taken to court. Whether you like the scenerio or not, whether he is a scam artist or not, bears no relevance to the evidence he has in his possession to move forward with some litigation. I loathe these kinds of people, who get attracted to this industry . KCRD should never have gotten involved with this bait and hook character in the first place.
 
Jerry, we're not far apart.

And Jason has some things to keep in mind. But with regard to this one statement by you:
These are the facts, everything else is of no consequence, if its taken to court. Whether you like the scenerio or not, whether he is a scam artist or not, bears no relevance to the evidence he has in his possession to move forward with some litigation.
Click to expand...

While it is possible that the scammer could move forward as you say, your statement that I highlighted above, about "other things being of no consequence if taken to court" ........ that is only your opinion, and one which many legal minds will disagree with aggressively. It may be of no consequence to his ability to file a complaint, but it is of every consequence if this were to ever get any serious consideration in court. Frankly, even with money to pursue this, the "scammer", and their case, would be shredded in deposition, if it even went that far. I defer back to Dan's advice.
 
Jerry,

You are completely overlooking the fact the guy knowingly and willingly committed fraud in this transaction with KCRD. Which IS a criminal offense. And yes the fact he did not ship when agreed upon will matter in small claims court, the fact he tried to force the deal even after he was told the deal was off will matter as will the fact that what he did ship was grossly misrepresented. WHICH IS FRAUD. Even in small claims court the guy would not have a chance.

To say fraud is not a crime is completely wrong. Ask the 1000's of people behind bars for fraud about that.
 
Jerry,
One last scenario which you raise, and an answer for those who may not have already surmised such: the ability of the scammer to file a harassing claim for $2K in small claims court. Jason doesn't want to invest money in attorneys if not needed. But if such a claim were filed, he would have to get one convenient to where the suit was filed. Could all be done by phone and email. But, he would already have the email communications, and the certified mail receipt, etc., to provide the attorney. He could also easily link the attorney to webpages explaining this type of scam with ball pythons, so that the attorney could educate him-or-her-self. The attorney would be glad for all. It would also be the basis for a counter-claim, to include all fees, should the scammer pursue the case. At that point, the motivation for the scammer falls apart, for they realize that the likelihood of success is nil, while the likelihood of increased costs is great. As Sammy points out, they are the last ones to want a light shone on this. I am still wondering, given all the cards as they exist, how you think Jason should proceed, as you have taken issue with the words and recommendations of others, and mentioned things that concern you. OK. What's the next play?
 
These posts

were not intended to start a war of some sort. What I am saying is that if it goes to small claims court in the state that this scammer is in, and a summons is issued to KCRD then it will have to be answered. Whether their would be a depostion, or other legal manuverings, is pure speculation.

I dont know how far KCRD would have to go, nor how much he would have to spend if the above situation occurred.
SHRAP, i understand exactly what you said in your previous post, but the judge in a civil matter would only be interested in proof. As ive indicated, he has some credible evidence, whether you like it or not, or whether you and I know he may be a scammer.

CHAMCO, the information that I provided is not my opinion. I am very familiar with the court system, and can assure you, that their would be no deposition between 2 parties in 2 different states. Its a simple civil small claims court matter . Whether KCRD show up if a summons is served, is another matter. If KCRD hires an attorney in the state of issuance, then that to is another matter, but it can get expensive. So when I say, it is of no consequence if its taken to court, what I am saying is that the fact that he may be a thief has no relationship to money orders that have been stopped, snakes that are no longer in his possession, shipping bills to the KCRD. Any attorney that has any weight in the court system, is going to capitalize on those facts.......and whether you agree with me or not. They are facts admissable in court.. Trying to proove someone is a scammer, would never hold up as an excuse.
 
Jim

sorry, I did not read your post when I responded.
No one knows how this is going to end up. But let me say this much. If this creep wanted to , in order to strengthen his position, threaten KCRD with writing a letter to the bank that the money orders were stopped on and complaining about some type of collusion between him and his wife in sending money orders , then stopping them. I am concerned about this !

I am also concerned that this creep has not contacted KCRD since this episode. Unless I am wrong, he may very well be planning some kind of litigation. I am concerned about this as well.

I have no intentions or illusions about desperate people doing desperate things. Ive dealt with people like this in the past, and when they smell money, they will take the least traveled road to attempt to get what they want. Litigation is not so far fetched of an idea. So I will wait and see if KCRD provides any additional information , as we move forward. Regards,
 
Jerry,

You seem to be looking at only half the facts. You seem to be completely ignoring the emails, the contents of the emails, the dates of the emails and the fact that what he did ship was not what was agreed upon or even wanted since by the time he did ship he was already informed the deal was off.

Those are the other half of the facts. The ones that would easily prove the sellers claims to be moot and only lead to criminal charges against the seller because at this point you file them with the prosecutor since you already have a lawyer involved. Then counter sue for all expenses. And none of this is based on anything but the current situation. It has nothing to do with the past.
 
Shrap

please understand that the facts that you speak about may or may not be relevant. On one side you have KCRD with emails, that could easily be considered self serving by a good attorney. On the other side of this coin, you have what Ive already indicated. Big difference. If you want to consider that they would both have equal weight in a court of law, then KCRD is going to be in trouble. The burden of proof of sending the snakes has already been established. The monies have been mysteriously stopped by his wife, who just happens to work at the same bank that the money orders were issued at. And finally, the receipt showing that the snakes were in fact shipped.

One other evil thought, Its very conceviable that this thief could easily say that the snakes that KCRD showed are NOT the snakes that were sent. So I understand exactly your concern, but emails, and postal receipts just dont provide a financial loss that this character may claim. I hope you understand that. Regards,
 
Points taken Jerry, and I do see what you are saying. I just feel there is plenty of evidence to thwart any attempts by the seller to pursue this in court. Because emails are admissible evidence in court and will hold just as much credence as what the seller can provide. Even more so in this case. I know I would feel very optimistic if it was me in KCRD's shoes. In fact I would look forward to it with glee.
 
Agreed Sammy. And Jason does not have to prove that the other person is a scammer. He only has to show that the animals were not accurately represented (easy to do with just minimal documentation), but more importantly, that he not only called off the deal before they were shipped, but then took definitive steps to either return them, or pay the estimated value of what he received, which BTW, is not the same as what he ordered and to which we all agree. Jason's documenting of how he tried to fairly remedy the situation is all that he has to show, and its hard to find fault with an immediate return. No judge in the world is going to find fault with Jason's attempts to find immediate and fair remedies. All this other speculation just doesn't matter. What I still can't find out is the opinion of "what should he now do" other than what has been advised. Dan gave some very sound advice earlier in the thread. To it was added to send it by the most documented legal means possible, short of designated courier. It was then said by Jerry that this would not fix or address other problems, or put as best I recall, that it would not prove certain things or address certain problems. OK Jerry, what actions would prove or solve? What is he to do at this point that he hasn't already done, in order to be as prepared as he can be for things highly unlikely to happen? Or maybe you are saying that his actions left him more exposed in some ways. I think most of us feel that Jason acted exactly right, and that all he can do is minimize the opportunity for the scammer to cause any additional grief to him, and recommended some simple things. I don't think anyone said "do this and you have no additional reason for concern". We did say that "this is what you should do to minimize your continued risk". And that may be as good as it gets right now. What I haven't seen is you Jerry recommend what he should have done differently, or should do from this point forward, in the exceptions that you took to the recommendations of others. Its not about disagreeing, but rather real curiosity. Just want to know what the additional advice is, if there is a basis for you taking exception, in order to learn from it.
 
KNOBTAIL said:
please understand that the facts that you speak about may or may not be relevant. On one side you have KCRD with emails, that could easily be considered self serving by a good attorney. On the other side of this coin, you have what Ive already indicated. Big difference. If you want to consider that they would both have equal weight in a court of law, then KCRD is going to be in trouble. The burden of proof of sending the snakes has already been established. The monies have been mysteriously stopped by his wife, who just happens to work at the same bank that the money orders were issued at. And finally, the receipt showing that the snakes were in fact shipped.

One other evil thought, Its very conceviable that this thief could easily say that the snakes that KCRD showed are NOT the snakes that were sent. So I understand exactly your concern, but emails, and postal receipts just dont provide a financial loss that this character may claim. I hope you understand that. Regards,
Click to expand...

Good points Jerry.
 
Jim

Your logic would work in a court of law with one exception. The fact that the checks were stopped. Had the checks not been stopped KCRD would have a greater weight of preponderance in the argument that you put forth. Many people return items and get refunds, but in this situation, you have the checks stopped and still maintain property of the livestock.

If I were the judge, I would ask for the animals, which according to your logic really belongs to the shipper. I think we both are in agreement here. The problem is that the shipper is going to deny that those are the snakes that he shipped. You can see the problem at this point.

So you really want to know how to handle this maze, here is the solution, take the first step and attack using your own attorney advising him that not only is their a potential lawsuit against him for not adhering to the email which is contractual, but you will file a complaint with the local police dept or other federal operation that handles internet fraud. Taking a strong initiative is the avenue I would pursue. Their may be some modifications in my approach, but that is the avenue I would travel down.
 
This has certainly been

enlightning. I do hope KCRD gets this mess resolved. One other noteworthy piece of advise. Please be a bit more discreet about your wifes occupation. It goes beyond , and should never be made public. Regards,
 
Jason is waiting for their reply as to how they want to handle this situation. It's probably the right approach at this point. Personally I wouldn't be so worried that they haven't made contact with him yet. Chances are that due to their past history they are more than willing to stay away from lawyers, courts, and the like.
 
Jerry, we agree much now ...

Sometimes certain situations here just beg for a bit of debate. This particular thread is somewhat unique in that "the scammer got scammed". I think most of us would wish this thread were mandatory reading for every person new to reptiles, who had not yet developed a savvy "buyer beware" regimen yet. We all would agree that one should use reasonable tools available to check out a seller, to include references, the BOI, etc. But even then, some scammers can stay under the radar. In this case, it was a well-known scammer with a new identity. You mentioned early on that the best thing would have been for Jason to have not done business with this person at all. Understood, and certainly sound advice, but it did not happen, and a few of us are glad that Jason got the snakes and the money, referred to more than once here as "scamming the scammer" ! It was not his original intent, but it worked out that way !

Jason's situation shows that despite reasonable precautions, you can still get caught up in a scam. In this case, Jason had some well defined parameters about the deal .. ie., when shipping was going to occur, a solid expectation of communications, etc. Just as soon as some of his expectations started to go awry, he stopped the deal. This is the lesson for others, that you can and should stop it just as soon as you smell smoke, and not wait to be completely burned. Jerry, I have no personal axe to grind with you, but you did take issue to some recommendations, not saying that they were wrong, but indicating that they did not address all. Since other readers here may unfortunately find themselves, or a friend, getting sucked into a deal as Jason did, my questions to you were what else are they to do once there to address your concerns?
You indicate that Jason should get very pro-active, and I could not agree more. My guess is that he could get the best advice on being pro-active for about $150 from a local attorney, and the sooner the better.
You also mention that ability of the shipper to say "those are not the snakes that I shipped". Maybe so, but that is a scenario possible in any scam, so it is not unique to this one. This is where Jason should do his best to get witnesses and pictures as promptly as possible (and document the ticks). It is also where any history of the shipper being involved in previous scams would come center stage. The suggestion of such, with just a minor amount of evidence, would cause the judge (in a simple small-claims case) to ask if a criminal complaint had been filed. We both know that there is no way Jason lets himself get pulled into a small-claims case without filing said complaint. As soon as the judge finds out that there is a criminal complaint, with charges filed or pending, then he's letting go of it, and will let the big-boy court handle it. The perp also does not push a small claims case if he/she knows that it only motivates a criminal complaint. You mention that the perp is after "easy money" and that means a "path of least resistence. This ain't it.
I agree with your assessment of the check thing too. Jason's abilities to get the checks stopped as he did was best kept to himself. He may be OK with it all, but still best kept quiet.
My view is that he doesn't face a problem that cannot be reasonably handled, and that possession is 9/10ths of the Law! Well done Jason.
 
Since reference was made to those that might not have alot of experience with this type of transaction, I will add one comment. My initial impression was that Jason jumped the gun by prematurely stopping payment. As it turned out, it was the correct thing to do...but pause for just a moment and look at the scenario. Jason agrees to make a purchase, and states that he will send payment on Monday via Priority Mail. Then states that if he cannot do that, he will send it Tuesday via Express Mail. Then, he actually sends payment on Wednesday. The seller was expecting to receive funds on Wednesday, to allow for shipment on Thursday. Personally, I don't think it is out of the ordinary that the seller didn't get the animals shipped as planned, since payment was not there when expected. Depending on the nature of his business, it may or may not be reasonable to assume that shipping plans can be cancelled and reinstated to allow for shipping immediately upon receipt of payment. Of course, this point is made moot by the current situation and the fact that we now know that the seller is a known scammer in a new identity. Glad you were quick to bail in this case...
 
Jerry, one other point to clarify:

Knobtail states:
Your logic would work in a court of law with one exception. The fact that the checks were stopped. Had the checks not been stopped KCRD would have a greater weight of preponderance in the argument that you put forth. Many people return items and get refunds, but in this situation, you have the checks stopped and still maintain property of the livestock.
Click to expand...

That the checks were stopped may place Jason (KCRD) in the position of having both animals and money, and I agree that this is not the normal "many people return items and get refunds" situation. But it is also not wrong. Many of us feel that Jason not only took the right steps here, but would recommend the same to anyone else caught in that moment, providing the checks are stopped in accordance with the law, and we are not jeopardizing someone's job by doing so. I do not think that any of us feel that Jason should have followed the usual return-refund situation i this instance, and therefore, while this situation may not be "normal", Jason's actions were still proper. I feel quite certain that the logic of this situation would work in court, as Jason did not plan this situation, and has attempted to return the animals from the beginning. We'll just agree to disagree on that one.
 
I completely understand

your sentiments, and I know that your thinking makes sense. But in a court room, the judge may not be so inclined to agree with that position. Its a basic shoot first and answer questions later . What I would like to know , without re reading everything, whether KCRD notified the seller that he was going to stop payment on those checks? And how soon after did the seller ship if notification was made? Just curious.

Jason, may not according to your logic plan the situation, but having the money orders prepared in the same bank that his wife works for, is a little more than a coincedence, and more likely an insurance policy in case something goes wrong. And it did! A very good argument can be drawn that Jason purposely provided those money orders through that bank knowiing full well that he may not have been able to stop the checks by using another bank. So its a tuff situation
 
Jerry, again we both think it problematic with the bank situation:

A very good argument can be drawn that Jason purposely provided those money orders through that bank knowiing full well that he may not have been able to stop the checks by using another bank. So its a tuff situation
Click to expand...

The argument can only be drawn if it is shown that banking laws and procedures were violated. All that you allege about the appearance created by Jason ending up with the snakes and the money only has merit if it can be shown that he conspired beforehand to make it so, and that once in possession of all, he made no attempts to immediately return what he did not pay for. Conspiracies must be proved, not alleged. All he needs is a legitimate explanation for the sequence of events, which he has. As HH pointed out, while his stop actions were initiated because he suspected a scam, the fact that it was a scam put him firmly in the driver's seat.
 
Back
Top