Bad Guy Legal battle hindering sale- Lea Hurst and Nikki Pardalis

[Dennis Hultman]

The original listing does state that she has a 50% non-refundable deposit policy. My only question is, because she essentially terminated the transaction, is that still to be upheld? It would seem unfair for a seller to have that policy so they could cancel a transaction at any time and know they could keep half the funds. I always felt those were if the buyer backed out, which I don't feel like I am doing, despite having requested a refund.

Nothing in that applies to your transaction.

 

[Pogaf]

Brittany, you may want to consider sending Lea's boss a link to this thread.
http://house-of-reptiles.com/meet-staff
He may be interested to know how trustworthy his employees are. Especially since her reputation in the reptile community could negatively affect his business.

Thanks for the idea, but I think it's best to avoid bringing more people into this than need to be- I want to keep it as professional as possible. I'm not trying to muddle her name, especially in a place not associated with this transaction. Plus, it'll be far more difficult to get a refund if she doesn't have a job!

 

[bcr229]

This is what I have been saying since the beginning. They were living together and conducting business together when the money was sent.

Co-habitation does not confer the rights, privileges, and responsiblities of either a marriage or a formal business partnership.

Nikki states she has the gecko in her possession now but won't ship it to the buyer. The buyer even offered to send more money to pay for the shipping, yet Nikki still refuses to ship the gecko to the buyer. Instead she wants the buyer to file complaints through paypal and her bank to further fuel the fire of tension between the two.

Bad business ethics on Nikki's part however you choose to twist it.

Lea and Nikki went into this "business" as individuals. Not real bright, but that's water under the bridge at this point.

Nikki has no contract with the OP. If Nikki and Lea had formed a partnership, corporation, or LLC, and that business entity owned the gecko, and OP had paid that business entity, then Nikki should ship.

We don't know what, if any, contract exists between Nikki and Lea regarding the geckos, and both have intimated that the dispute over who owns what is likely to end up in court.

Lea got paid but can't ship what was promised, so she needs to refund the buyer.

 

[Pogaf]

Lea answered my email to her requesting a refund:

As far as I'm aware, they did not share financial accounts. The money I sent Lea is still held by Lea, regardless of the gecko's owner. I don't think my transaction with her should be impacted by a court case. If I was demanding Fangorn be released to me, that's one thing, as his ownership is in question, but the money I sent is not.

 

[KenyaChams]

I would like to clear a few things up.

First and foremost, I am in a legal battle with Lea over a restraining order I requested against her in order to protect myself. Regardless of if I felt I should send Brittany Fangorn to right Leas wrong against her, I am not legally able to at the moment as the legal ownership of the animals is up in the air. Shipping him would be a huge mistake legally so unfortunately, patience is all we have to deal with the situation for now.

Part of the issue is that Lea left many, many animals here at my home purposefully when she vacated including animals that are hers and court ordered to be removed yet she refuses to take back. Many of the animals in this legal grey area are the gecko collection that I purchased, she bred and advertised, and told me "never sold".

I wasn't thrilled when I found out she was advertising them in June but didn't want to make waves. I figured if she managed to sell a few babies, she would back off and leave me with the adults that I had paid for and was attached to. The nature of our relationship at the time meant that Lea did as she pleased and to be honest, I was not active in the reptile community and just trying to hold my personal life together. I wasn't aware of how long she was advertising the geckos and our main dispute is over the breeding pairs of parents anyway, not the juveniles that are already produced so when she did mention she had been advertising a few of the babies but without luck, I didn't think much of it beyond annoyance that she hadn't asked me before doing it.

We agreed that the cresteds would stay with me when we were originally negotiating her moving out in very early July (before things got bad and I requested a protective order) because she had no interest or means to care for them and I had already been arguing for months that they were rightfully mine and I should be allowed to keep them since I paid for them, their housing, their food, and generally cared for their needs. Lea agreed that they were mine and I should keep them at that point and didn't say a word about the ones that apparently had sold.

When she left, she had plenty of time to grab what she wanted. She chose to not take the geckos even though she had ample opportunity, wouldn't take them later when told to remove her animals via a police escort and third party, and made zero attempts to notify me of Brittanys existence before sending her my personal information.

This is a very tenuous legal issue and I am so sorry that Brittany is caught in the middle. I told her to pursue a refund from Lea not as a brush off but because it is the quickest, most direct way to find a resolution. Brittany, you absolutely deserve a full refund at the very least but it needs to come from the person who took your money, Lea. I'm sorry that I can't right her wrong but I'm not responsible for her errors. I sympathize but this is just another manifestation of the reasoning behind all the current legal issues I'm facing.

 

[Dennis Hultman]

Lea answered my email to her requesting a refund:

As far as I'm aware, they did not share financial accounts. The money I sent Lea is still held by Lea, regardless of the gecko's owner. I don't think my transaction with her should be impacted by a court case. If I was demanding Fangorn be released to me, that's one thing, as his ownership is in question, but the money I sent is not.

What a load.

Lea, send the funds back to the person you took them from and provided nothing. Then deal with whatever accusations you have with your former partner.

I'm not a lawyer but I don't see how accusing your former partner of theft prevents you from returning the funds to your buyer.

Even if it did, the ethical thing to do is refund your customer.

 

[Pogaf]

My reply to Lea:

 

[Pogaf]

What a load.

Lea, send the funds back to the person you took them from and provided nothing. Then deal with whatever accusations you have with your former partner.

I'm not a lawyer but I don't see how accusing your former partner of theft prevents you from returning the funds to your buyer.

Even if it did, the ethical thing to do is refund your customer.

I think the "lawyers said" talk is what's getting me the most frustrated in this whole thing. I understand how sending the gecko when its ownership is in question is a potential problem. But I feel like the "my lawyer said/advised" is being used as an excuse at this point. It's like saying you can't pay your electric bill because your lawyer said your former roommate might be responsible for some it... you still pay the bill and figure that out later.

 

[Lucille]

Property division can be complex. That said, there is zero proof from either of them that there are indeed any lawyers involved. The FIRST thing an attorney ordinarily tells a client is to be quiet, (not even 'my lawyer said this') yet here Lea is, chirping away to try to excuse her action (or inaction).

On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Lea Hurst <[email protected]> wrote:

I'm getting out of the reptile world for good.

I think Lea Hurst believes that since she is getting out of reptiles, this thread will not have an impact on her future. I think she forgets that this thread will come up on searches of her name.
Based on her shenanigans, I would not hire her, have a relationship with her, or trust her with money at all, whatsoever. Anyone planning on doing so would be well advised to look at what she has done here to an innocent third party before having any sort or relationship business or personal with her at all, in my opinion.

What a load.

Lea, send the funds back to the person you took them from and provided nothing. Then deal with whatever accusations you have with your former partner.

^
This

 

[Sinofmen]

I still think they are both full of crap!!

 

[Chris Kennard]

I would like to clear a few things up.

First and foremost, I am in a legal battle with Lea over a restraining order I requested against her in order to protect myself. Regardless of if I felt I should send Brittany Fangorn to right Leas wrong against her, I am not legally able to at the moment as the legal ownership of the animals is up in the air. Shipping him would be a huge mistake legally so unfortunately, patience is all we have to deal with the situation for now.

Part of the issue is that Lea left many, many animals here at my home purposefully when she vacated including animals that are hers and court ordered to be removed yet she refuses to take back. Many of the animals in this legal grey area are the gecko collection that I purchased, she bred and advertised, and told me "never sold".

I wasn't thrilled when I found out she was advertising them in June but didn't want to make waves. I figured if she managed to sell a few babies, she would back off and leave me with the adults that I had paid for and was attached to. The nature of our relationship at the time meant that Lea did as she pleased and to be honest, I was not active in the reptile community and just trying to hold my personal life together. I wasn't aware of how long she was advertising the geckos and our main dispute is over the breeding pairs of parents anyway, not the juveniles that are already produced so when she did mention she had been advertising a few of the babies but without luck, I didn't think much of it beyond annoyance that she hadn't asked me before doing it.

We agreed that the cresteds would stay with me when we were originally negotiating her moving out in very early July (before things got bad and I requested a protective order) because she had no interest or means to care for them and I had already been arguing for months that they were rightfully mine and I should be allowed to keep them since I paid for them, their housing, their food, and generally cared for their needs. Lea agreed that they were mine and I should keep them at that point and didn't say a word about the ones that apparently had sold.

When she left, she had plenty of time to grab what she wanted. She chose to not take the geckos even though she had ample opportunity, wouldn't take them later when told to remove her animals via a police escort and third party, and made zero attempts to notify me of Brittanys existence before sending her my personal information.

This is a very tenuous legal issue and I am so sorry that Brittany is caught in the middle. I told her to pursue a refund from Lea not as a brush off but because it is the quickest, most direct way to find a resolution. Brittany, you absolutely deserve a full refund at the very least but it needs to come from the person who took your money, Lea. I'm sorry that I can't right her wrong but I'm not responsible for her errors. I sympathize but this is just another manifestation of the reasoning behind all the current legal issues I'm facing.

I'm confused. I thought the legal battle was over the animals. You say here it's over a restraining order. Then you say she was court ordered to get the animals and had plenty of time to get "what she wanted". And please elaborate on how shipping a friggin lizard would be a huge mistake. I think your both nuts and should be ashamed. Lea, give the op her money back that you took.

 

[SofaKing]

I personally believe that these 2 are the same person, but for sh#ts and giggles, lets say they are really different people.

This is a scam loud and clear, even Stevie Wonder can see it!

Lea has mentioned other buyers who haven't received the animals they purchased, why haven't any of them speak out?

This whole story is nothing but bs, it's so ridiculous!

Any time I hear a Lawyer mentioned when on Fauna, I laugh. We all know it's the main thing scammers always bring up. And of course some sort of sad story to try to through people off the trail... Not me!

Brittany, fill out a police report. You have with in 1yr to do so. Then Lea/Nikki can hire a real Lawyer since the charges would be Theft, Theft by perception, Fraud etc...

I'd just stop waiting for this bs story to come to an end, cause it won't....

 

[agno3]

I just want to say that I know both Lea and Nikki. They are two different people, not some complex conspiracy. There are currently legal things happening between the two of them and Lea needs to refund the OP.

 

[Bobby Douglass]

I'm confused. I thought the legal battle was over the animals. You say here it's over a restraining order. Then you say she was court ordered to get the animals and had plenty of time to get "what she wanted". And please elaborate on how shipping a friggin lizard would be a huge mistake. I think your both nuts and should be ashamed. Lea, give the op her money back that you took.

I agree. They're both just making stuff up as they go. I don't think Nikki is quiet as innocent as most seem to think. She knew Lea bred the geckos and had some of them for sale. She now knows at least one of them did sell. I would feel like a thief keeping the gecko. Buyer beware for both Lea and Nikki in my opinion.

 

[Chris Kennard]

I would like to clear a few things up.

First and foremost, I am in a legal battle with Lea over a restraining order I requested against her in order to protect myself. Regardless of if I felt I should send Brittany Fangorn to right Leas wrong against her, I am not legally able to at the moment as the legal ownership of the animals is up in the air. Shipping him would be a huge mistake legally so unfortunately, patience is all we have to deal with the situation for now.

Part of the issue is that Lea left many, many animals here at my home purposefully when she vacated including animals that are hers and court ordered to be removed yet she refuses to take back. Many of the animals in this legal grey area are the gecko collection that I purchased, she bred and advertised, and told me "never sold".

I wasn't thrilled when I found out she was advertising them in June but didn't want to make waves. I figured if she managed to sell a few babies, she would back off and leave me with the adults that I had paid for and was attached to. The nature of our relationship at the time meant that Lea did as she pleased and to be honest, I was not active in the reptile community and just trying to hold my personal life together. I wasn't aware of how long she was advertising the geckos and our main dispute is over the breeding pairs of parents anyway, not the juveniles that are already produced so when she did mention she had been advertising a few of the babies but without luck, I didn't think much of it beyond annoyance that she hadn't asked me before doing it.

We agreed that the cresteds would stay with me when we were originally negotiating her moving out in very early July (before things got bad and I requested a protective order) because she had no interest or means to care for them and I had already been arguing for months that they were rightfully mine and I should be allowed to keep them since I paid for them, their housing, their food, and generally cared for their needs. Lea agreed that they were mine and I should keep them at that point and didn't say a word about the ones that apparently had sold.

When she left, she had plenty of time to grab what she wanted. She chose to not take the geckos even though she had ample opportunity, wouldn't take them later when told to remove her animals via a police escort and third party, and made zero attempts to notify me of Brittanys existence before sending her my personal information.

This is a very tenuous legal issue and I am so sorry that Brittany is caught in the middle. I told her to pursue a refund from Lea not as a brush off but because it is the quickest, most direct way to find a resolution. Brittany, you absolutely deserve a full refund at the very least but it needs to come from the person who took your money, Lea. I'm sorry that I can't right her wrong but I'm not responsible for her errors. I sympathize but this is just another manifestation of the reasoning behind all the current legal issues I'm facing.

I think there are more "grey" areas in you vague posts than in your legal situation. Could you please just explain your statement..."Lea left many, many animals here at my home purposefully when she vacated INCLUDING ANIMALS THAT WERE HER'S...". Was she supposed to take animals that weren't her's? What animals was she supposed to take as per the "court order"? And don't be sorry you can't right her wrong. Be sorry you won't right her wrong. Pretty petty. Either one of you has the ability to step up and make the real victim here right. I imagine the only person who has lost any sleep at all over this is the OP.

 

[Chris Kennard]

I agree. They're both just making stuff up as they go. I don't think Nikki is quiet as innocent as most seem to think. She knew Lea bred the geckos and had some of them for sale. She now knows at least one of them did sell. I would feel like a thief keeping the gecko. Buyer beware for both Lea and Nikki in my opinion.

 

[Pogaf]

Lea's reply to my previous email RE: the refund policy

I do not know if she's referring to the post or actual action that was taken. Regardless, I want to reiterate that I do not condone anyone contacting her place of business, nor do I want anyone to do so. That will not help my cause and is 100% unprofessional and unnecessary. I am trying to find a resolution without using juvenile threats or methods, no matter how unfair the situation is against me.

My next step, if no resolution is found, will be a small claims suit. If anyone would like to come forward and email me with information about the Oregon court system I would be most appreciative. I will ONLY be going forward with this legally- there will be ZERO use of any "blackmail" or shady actions.


And in regards to the emails- this is the first I've heard of any shared bank account.

 

[Chris Kennard]

Lea's reply to my previous email RE: the refund policy

I do not know if she's referring to the post or actual action that was taken. Regardless, I want to reiterate that I do not condone anyone contacting her place of business, nor do I want anyone to do so. That will not help my cause and is 100% unprofessional and unnecessary. I am trying to find a resolution without using juvenile threats or methods, no matter how unfair the situation is against me.

My next step, if no resolution is found, will be a small claims suit. If anyone would like to come forward and email me with information about the Oregon court system I would be most appreciative. I will ONLY be going forward with this legally- there will be ZERO use of any "blackmail" or shady actions.


And in regards to the emails- this is the first I've heard of any shared bank account.

I think Lea is using you to relay her defenses here. She is using the "lawyer" excuse to avoid standing up for herself. Obviously someone is feeding these posts to her.

 

[Pogaf]

I think Lea is using you to relay her defenses here. She is using the "lawyer" excuse to avoid standing up for herself. Obviously someone is feeding these posts to her.

She has been informed of this thread, so hopefully she is viewing it.

The talking in circles is starting to get frustrating. I'm most concerned that if everything I'm being told is true, the legal issues will drag out for a long while and things will get more and more into the "gray" zone. It's pretty cut and dry right now IMO.

 

[gila7150]

I would proceed with whatever course of action you feel is appropriate. They are clearly lying to you.
You might try this as well...
http://www.ic3.gov/complaint/default.aspx
Non delivery of goods is a potential felony and since the purchase was made over the internet it's a federal offense.