Bad Guy Kimberly Lucas Gorgeousgecko.com con artist!!

[TailsWithScales]

Apologies for double post.

Yes I agree the title of the thread is bad but complaining about that and making claims about it being removed doesn't solve the true problem and that's Brian possibly receiving something he didn't pay for.

If you're not willing to take the animal back then refund half his purchase price if not more and allow him to sell the gecko. Because clearly the animal isn't how you represented it upon the time of sale.

 

[Abby]

If you're not willing to take the animal back then refund half his purchase price if not more and allow him to sell the gecko. Because clearly the animal isn't how you represented it upon the time of sale.

I was thinking a refund of 1/2 the price if he keeps it would be fair as well. Great minds must think alike

 

[Omnomnami]

It is intersting to me how Brian origionally called his female a "moonglow" and now he does not. Hmmm

All I can give you is my experience of the gecko when I had it. I think that comes across in the emails. There was no intentional deciet. It makes no sense that I would do that.

The return policy is there for a reason. I can't have geckos sent back to me after being exposed to who knows what.

For me this was out of left field. I sent what I took pictures of and WHAM! All sorts of accusations start flying. At what point do you say enough is enough. In 7 years selling geckos. I have had one other unhappy customer that I am aware of and even that was resolvd peacefully and I received a letter calling me a "class act".

I don't take kindly to being referred to as a liar or accused of altering photos to sell my geckos. That doesn't make me want to work with you on a soultion and I won't be bullied into refunding $ when it is against my policy.

I think the hang up is in the term "moonglow". I don't believe that the gecko I sent is not ever presenting the "color" I photographed him at. I think that is a bunch of BS. Apparently he is not showing that color 24/7 but I highly doubt he is NEVER that color unless is is extremely stressed out all the time.

I am surprised to see that the gecko has had a change in his color because that never happend with me. Then I have to wonder if I am being taken advantage of and it's just not a case of buyers remorse. It just doesn't make any sense to me either and I have no way of knowing the stress the gecko is/was under to make him change to a darker color.

Who's to say an amazing red gecko is only worth $450 when its fired up. Most of the time red geckos stay grey. I mean really, lets get some perspective here. These are GECKOS, they are not exactly predictable. They may lose their tails, they may fire up an amazing color once and then nothing for months. If you have any experience with crested geckos you know this. Even when you buy a gecko at top dollar you know it may not always look stunning.

I'm just saying, you don't go around making unfounded claims against someones character and take no responsibility for it. That is just wrong.

Posting that title in the thread was way out of line.

Ok, before you try to make him look bad for mislabeling his Crestie...which he DIDN'T, how about you stick to the subject of your misrepresented animal. Ya know, the gecko in question!? Stop trying to advert the attention to something else.

The gecko arrived to him severely different and you are saying you can't take it back because of a "Return Policy"?

The question of altering the photos was taken in to consideration then ruled out with Exif data. Get over it. Everyone else has!

So you're shocked that the gecko changed color so much since you have never seen him like this. Well, he is that color now and hasn't showed the represented color since he arrived. If you are so concerned about it being stressed in its new home then why don't you take him back? And while you're at it maybe you can produce more "Moonglows" with him.

Your customer feels scammed and wants a refund. WOULDN'T YOU? I mean, this animal WAS supposed to be a Moonglow, right?

And we also realize that the OP shouldn't have called you Con Artist. Again, get over it and pay attention to the topic at hand and make things right.

 

[Jadenkisses]

Even when you buy a gecko at top dollar you know it may not always look stunning.

Perhaps, buy anyone here will tell you that if they payed $450 for a white gecko, and recieved a regular olive/tan gecko, they would be quite angry. Especially if it never showed the colors it was depicted to have. Like others have said, the gecko they recieved is worth about $50. It doesn't ever look stunning. Heck, my male who I payed less than $150 for is stunning weither he's fired up or not. That gecko is simply not worth the money you charged for it, period. I honestly think you need to accept the gecko back and give him his money back - done deal. I really don't think you have anything to lose by accepting this gecko back, as I'm sure you know how to take proper quarintine measures to keep your animals safe. But, you do have something to gain by not accepting the gecko back - $400, because the gecko they recieved is worth $400 less than what you charged. JMHO.

 

[snakebuz]

The exif data doesnt prove anything as far as the pic goes...it just shows how the picture was taken....it could then have been lightened using any number of photo enhancing programs.

 

[gorgeousgecko]

I have been accused of several things in this post and to say I am not "out" anything is naive. This is bullying someone to get what you want and he has posted disparraging remarks on this site that can not be undone and has made accusations that are false about the way I do business.
For me to give him what he wants at this point just looks like there is some truth to his accusations and there is not!
Being an unhappy customer is one thing but going on a public forum and mudslinging with intent to drag someone down is not something I plan on cowering to.

 

[aleria]

The exif data doesnt prove anything as far as the pic goes...it just shows how the picture was taken....it could then have been lightened using any number of photo enhancing programs.

And apparently you have absolutely no idea what exif data is exactly. Not only does it detail the pictures statistics from the camera itself but also any software that was used on it. Usually a telltale sign that we all look for in the exif data is a section that specifies the use of photoshop or other similar programs. And as you can see in the data, not one single entry of it states that editing software was used.

I agree that the gecko is nothing like the original pictures, but those original pictures are just that, original and unaltered.

 

[gorgeousgecko]

Souldn't the real question be just that.. are the pictures accurate? Since we have established that they are UNALTERED it goes to understand my point of view on the matter. Regardless of the amount anyone thinks he overpaid. He paid it willingly.
Who's to say he isn't screwing with me.

I am a reasonble person...
I would have had no problem coming to a better compromise if he hadn't handled it the way he did. Now the words are out there and it's kind of the point of no return when you go down that path.

 

[aleria]

Yes, the pictures sent were unaltered. But that does not change the fact that the gecko received looks absolutely nothing like the gecko pictured. Whether it be from something as simple as stress, or the fact that something more devious, such as being sent an entirely different gecko is going on here.

Either way the customer is unhappy and refusing to do anything to remedy the situation just because he chose to post to the boi AFTER you wouldn't work with him on any sort of agreement is no way to resolve this or keep a good name for yourself. It's doing nothing more for your reputation than showing people that if they do have a problem you will dig your heels in and force them to put up with being unhappy with their purchase with no remedy from you.

 

[Abby]

Souldn't the real question be just that.. are the pictures accurate? Since we have established that they are UNALTERED it goes to understand my point of view on the matter. Regardless of the amount anyone thinks he overpaid. He paid it willingly.
Who's to say he isn't screwing with me.

I am a reasonble person...
I would have had no problem coming to a better compromise if he hadn't handled it the way he did. Now the words are out there and it's kind of the point of no return when you go down that path.

He paid willingly for a white gecko. Not for an olive/buckskin gecko.

Also, these BOI posts can be turned around easily. It is how you represent yourself and solve a problem that counts. Not the title of the thread. Anyone reading the BOI who wants to do business with you will open this thread up and skim through it to see if it was resolved with the OP. The way you are handling things right now doesn't make you look too good. If you would just do the right thing you could come out of this looking golden. It isn't too late.

 

[deborahbroadus]

He paid willingly for a white gecko. Not for an olive/buckskin gecko.

Also, these BOI posts can be turned around easily. It is how you represent yourself and solve a problem that counts. Not the title of the thread. Anyone reading the BOI who wants to do business with you will open this thread up and skim through it to see if it was resolved with the OP. The way you are handling things right now doesn't make you look too good. If you would just do the right thing you could come out of this looking golden. It isn't too late.

I agree, and the longer the seller waits..the longer the thread goes on, and if the seller does finally make good in the end, it still doesn't look good.

I suggest she pony up now to change the tone of the thread.

 

[moonrisegeckos]

The gecko looks like it was in shed in the picture sent by the seller. You can see the mouth area is shiny while the rest of the body is quite dull. This is how cresties look pre-shed.

If I had an unhappy customer, I would give a full refund, period. You really only have your reputation to stand on in this business. You may not agree that the customer is right, but you have to make good on every deal, IMO.

 

[gorgeousgecko]

Hello... I made an offer. $150 credit (more geckos) He was willing to take $150 cash and keep the gecko so I really don't see how $150 of geckos is such an insult. I think he just wants to be a jerk.
I would have been open to further converstaion but it's been over a month and this was how I was contacted. A link to this thread.

 

[timebider]

I have been accused of several things in this post and to say I am not "out" anything is naive. This is bullying someone to get what you want and he has posted disparraging remarks on this site that can not be undone and has made accusations that are false about the way I do business.
For me to give him what he wants at this point just looks like there is some truth to his accusations and there is not!
Being an unhappy customer is one thing but going on a public forum and mudslinging with intent to drag someone down is not something I plan on cowering to.

Okay...but you can't really claim that this BOI thread is the reason you're not "giving in," since you still refused him any restitution at all before he came here. In fact, he probably would never have created this thread had you been reasonable with him the first time he indicated his displeasure to you. He gave the gecko ample opportunity to live up to your advertisement; it never did, so he then offered to return it at his own expense for a refund. Those are the actions of a reasonable, patient buyer.

For the sake of argument: let's assume that the gecko the OP received from you, Kim, is indeed the same one you advertised and sold to him (heck, I do believe it is). A good seller who finds herself placed in this situation, and who wants to keep her reputation solid, would scratch her head and say, "Gosh, I have no idea why he won't color up for you like he does for me, but since you don't feel like you got what you paid for, send him back for a refund." You'd have avoided a BOI thread (unless he posted a GOOD one on you for being so great to deal with) and probably retained a repeat customer.

I completely understand feeling defensive about this thread - though, honestly, I haven't seen one example of false accusations, mudslinging, or disparaging remarks from the OP towards you. He unquestionably exercised bad judgment in his choice of thread title, but haven't we all acted badly out of frustration/anger before? He has pretty much been purely factual in his quest for a resolution - an absolute dream of a customer, IMHO. The speculations and accusations you reference have almost exclusively come from other posters.

You are making yourself sound petty, childish and unreasonable by turning this into an "I-can't-let-him-get-away-with-this" argument instead of dealing strictly in facts - even if said facts don't make sense to you, such as the gecko inexplicably changing color. Potential buyers are going to be reading this, and how you carry yourself here (both demeanor and actions), MORE than what anyone else says, will determine whether they decide to trust you with their business.

I know nothing about geckos, but the one he photographed is night and day from the pic in your ad. I'd feel scammed, too, if I spent that much money expecting a white gecko and got an olive one instead. Is it OK with you for your customer to feel scammed?

 

[gorgeousgecko]

I believe he posted in his origional post that I had had sent altered photos and called me a liar. I consider that disparaging.

 

[USARK]

I know Kimberly Lucas well. She is a first class breeder, business person and human being. She has impeccable character. The purchaser read her TOS and purchased the gecko. He got the animal represented. Even with all of that the gentlemen decided he was unsatisfied. Kimberly offered compromise and remedy. He declined. Now he wants to slander her name. That is unfortunate; and shameful. She works hard every day to support her family. She should not have to suffer the public drama and unwarranted accusations she now has to deal with here on this forum. Her animals, her reputation for fair dealings and customer service, along with her high level of personal integrity speak volumes about the true Kimberly Lucas. Please cease and desist. Thank you.

Andrew Wyatt
President/ USARK

 

[Gecko_Den]

I know Kimberly Lucas well. She is a first class breeder, business person and human being. She has impeccable character. The purchaser read her TOS and purchased the gecko. He got the animal represented. Even with all of that the gentlemen decided he was unsatisfied. Kimberly offered compromise and remedy. He declined. Now he wants to slander her name. That is unfortunate; and shameful. She works hard every day to support her family. She should not have to suffer the public drama and unwarranted accusations she now has to deal with here on this forum. Her animals, her reputation for fair dealings and customer service, along with her high level of personal integrity speak volumes about the true Kimberly Lucas. Please cease and desist. Thank you.

Andrew Wyatt
President/ USARK

Really, I hardly see any evidence of libel (that's what it's called when its the written word, not slander), some may say he received an animal that was "misrepresented" as it's obvious that the animal he received doesn't resemble the picture she provided. And while she offered a compromise, it was not satisfactory in the eyes of the purchaser, why do you feel that he should just end it there when they failed to come to a resolution that was satisfactory to both parties? "Unwarranted accusations" may be your opinion of the situation, but others appear to differ in their opinion of whether or not it's warranted. As for her "reputation for fair dealings and customer service, along with her high level of personal integrity", as someone who had never heard of her prior to this thread, i don't see her displaying any of those characteristics in her handling of THIS situation. "Cease and desist", LOL, really now that was the funniest part of the whole post...

 

[bad-one]

I know Kimberly Lucas well. She is a first class breeder, business person and human being. She has impeccable character. The purchaser read her TOS and purchased the gecko. He got the animal represented.

I'm sorry but that buckskin/olive gecko is not what the OP paid for. He paid $450 for a gecko that was represented as white/or nearly white.

 

[timebider]

I know Kimberly Lucas well. She is a first class breeder, business person and human being. She has impeccable character. The purchaser read her TOS and purchased the gecko. He got the animal represented. Even with all of that the gentlemen decided he was unsatisfied. Kimberly offered compromise and remedy. He declined. Now he wants to slander her name. That is unfortunate; and shameful. She works hard every day to support her family. She should not have to suffer the public drama and unwarranted accusations she now has to deal with here on this forum. Her animals, her reputation for fair dealings and customer service, along with her high level of personal integrity speak volumes about the true Kimberly Lucas. Please cease and desist. Thank you.

Andrew Wyatt
President/ USARK

Are you serious? I personally don't know Kimberly Lucas from Adam; all I have to go on is what I see here. I consider myself an intelligent enough person to be able to see through most of the BS offered by disgruntled buyers and sellers alike. There is undoubtedly plenty being served up by both primary parties here, but as a breeder, I tend to look at things more from the point of view of what I would do myself as the seller in each case - except when I'm a buyer, deciding whether to spend hundreds or thousands on someone's animals while avoiding not only known scammers but also sellers who seem potentially difficult or unreasonable to deal with.

Strictly as a bystander, I'd suggest that you, Andrew, not sign such blustery posts with your USARK title. I appreciate the sentiment and rationale behind your message, but I personally don't like to see such partiality shown by someone in your position - and not strictly rational partiality, at that. Put yourself in the OP's position: you spend $450 for a white gecko that turns out to be brown. Does that not look like a misrepresentation, whether intentional or not? And then, the only remedy offered is $150 off the purchase of more geckos that may or may not be what you paid for.

As the wife of a blind man and mother of two kids with "issues," I have more than complete respect for Kimberley's hard work to support her family, believe me. Personally, if I ever had a thread like this on me (God forbid), I'd want to put my fist through a wall while shouting some very bad language. I can imagine how the seller feels, especially if she's anything like me, where situations like this eat at you constantly.

My point was simply this: even when they feel they are clearly in the right, sellers need to make a calculated judgment based on what's ultimately worth more: a solid reputation in this small industry, or a $450 sale at the expense (to the seller) of an unhappy customer who feels he's been cheated. It may seem - or even be - truly unfair, but sometimes it's in our best interests to suck it up and gracefully accommodate a buyer, even against our TOS. It's probably honestly no one's fault that that gecko is one color at Kimberley's house and another color at the OP's. The blame will always fall on the seller. Maybe it's not fair, but that's just the cost of continuing to do good business.

 

[bobtard]

Still, even with a $150 refund/credit, that's $300 for a male buckskin ($250 if shipping was figured into the $450.)