• 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 Legal battle hindering sale- Lea Hurst and Nikki Pardalis

ShadowAceD said:
I think in the state of AZ you can open a small claims in AZ because the transaction, on your end, was completed in AZ (when you sent payment form your account). If that is the case, you'd win by default if she doesn't show up should they accept the claim (and they should).
Click to expand...

Just thought I would chime in on this part. Yes you would win by default BUT it will take FOREVER for them to give you the money since she's in a different state. We went to small claims (due to a wretched landlord) and won the case since the landlord didn't show up (she lives in CA and we live in CO). Its been almost 5 months and we haven't received our money since the landord hasn't paid up. Its very difficult opening a case with the other person in a different state. Honestly, it would be a lot easier if you went to their state and opened up a case. IMO.
 
Also I've been reading a lot on how her "lawyer" won't let her send you the money back. Have you made an attempt to contact her lawyer, or ask for her lawyers information? Who knows what crap she's been telling her lawyer (if she even has one). If you can get in contact with her lawyer and explain what happened (also mention that you are threatening to sue) then maybe she will send you the money back and this will be over with.
 
seanleigh said:
Also I've been reading a lot on how her "lawyer" won't let her send you the money back. Have you made an attempt to contact her lawyer, or ask for her lawyers information? Who knows what crap she's been telling her lawyer (if she even has one). If you can get in contact with her lawyer and explain what happened (also mention that you are threatening to sue) then maybe she will send you the money back and this will be over with.
Click to expand...

I do believe they have been asked for the lawyer's contact information multiple times.
 
Pogaf said:
Interesting... I haven't explored that option. Collecting on that might be very tricky though. I will most certainly look into it!
Click to expand...

Collecting ANY judgment you win via small claims is going to be tricky to collect. Everyone seems to think it is like an ATM machine... Judge says "You Win" and the Bailiff walks over and hands you a check for the full amount. That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.

YOU are responsible for collecting ANY money the small claims judge agrees you are owed. That's all that court can really do... agree with your claim, and affirm that you are owed the amount in questions. They do NOT help you collect one red cent, they do NOT involve themselves in ANY financial dealings whatsoever. YOU are responsible to convince them to pay, hire a claims collector to convince them to pay (who will take a %), or go through her LOCAL Sheriff's office to try to establish a Writ of Garnishment on her paychecks... assuming she's even working at a job with a legit W-2, which is doubtful.

You are barking up not just the wrong tree, but a sincerely misguided, incorrectly optimistic, misinformed, and long-term financial negative tree if you continue to entertain thoughts of a small claims case. You are the only one who's going to come out of that a loser, even if they don't show up and you "win" automatically. The absolute minimum that anyone should consider small claims action for is $2-3K, and even then, once your personal time, effort, energy, resources, and mental health are accounted for, you're likely still losing. It's only $225. Press for their "lawyers'" info and take that route if you still have the energy for it, but if you're seriously considering legal action, just let it go and take the loss. I GUARANTEE you it will cost you 10X the amount you're trying to win, to pursue this.
 
I have a felling Lea/Nikki created 2 other accounts, Rich, Dennis or someone might want to check and see.


What are the odds of 2 people having the same Birthday and supposedly be a year apart are involved in the same scam?!
 
Mister Internet said:
Collecting ANY judgment you win via small claims is going to be tricky to collect. Everyone seems to think it is like an ATM machine... Judge says "You Win" and the Bailiff walks over and hands you a check for the full amount. That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.

YOU are responsible for collecting ANY money the small claims judge agrees you are owed. That's all that court can really do... agree with your claim, and affirm that you are owed the amount in questions. They do NOT help you collect one red cent, they do NOT involve themselves in ANY financial dealings whatsoever. YOU are responsible to convince them to pay, hire a claims collector to convince them to pay (who will take a %), or go through her LOCAL Sheriff's office to try to establish a Writ of Garnishment on her paychecks... assuming she's even working at a job with a legit W-2, which is doubtful.

You are barking up not just the wrong tree, but a sincerely misguided, incorrectly optimistic, misinformed, and long-term financial negative tree if you continue to entertain thoughts of a small claims case. You are the only one who's going to come out of that a loser, even if they don't show up and you "win" automatically. The absolute minimum that anyone should consider small claims action for is $2-3K, and even then, once your personal time, effort, energy, resources, and mental health are accounted for, you're likely still losing. It's only $225. Press for their "lawyers'" info and take that route if you still have the energy for it, but if you're seriously considering legal action, just let it go and take the loss. I GUARANTEE you it will cost you 10X the amount you're trying to win, to pursue this.
Click to expand...

Exactly and I was going to mention this sooner. I won a civil case for a little over $1,000 6 years ago. I still have not seen a dime of that money. This is exactly why I was insisting that Brittany get the gecko delivered by Nikki, since Nikki is in possession of it and it's obvious to me Nikki was fully aware of this sell and just using all this to get back at Lea.

Brittany you have been screwed hunny, by Lea and Nikki and I feel so bad for you in this situation.
 
MedusaCoil said:
It's not breaking the law to give a refund and I never said it was. They are both speaking with their lawyers so obviously real lawyers have cautioned them about this and told them to hold off until further notice.You also seem to have poor reading skills Bobby, may I refer you to an English tutor?
Click to expand...

If you mean that because I don't believe everything they say that I have poor reading skills then I guess I do. My opinion is that they're both lying and that you think you're important enough that we'll all take your word as fact. You're not.
 
But really this court stuff has nothing to do with a refund, we can debate laws all day long. In the end Lea stole money from the OP and refuses to give it back now. This is theft of money and who has ownership of the animals doesn't matter. Seeing as Lea never had "permission" to sell... It would be just like someone getting scammed by paying for the animal and it not being shipped. That is exactly what happened here.

Now they are throwing the my lawyer this and that out. There is no proof to any of this. Plan and simple, Lea stole money from the OP and refuses to pay it. They can throw the my lawyer stuff around all they want, but it has nothing to do with the fact she stole money and now refuses to give it back. The OP has no claims in their "legal" matter so it wouldn't make one bit of difference to refund the money.
 
KenyaChams said:
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.
Click to expand...

Lea may not have had actual "permission" to sell them but Nikki did know about it and didn't seem to have that big a problem with it. It doesn't change the fact that Lea owes a refund but I believe some people think that Nikki was unaware that they were for sale.
 
Whoever sold the gecko needs to refund the money...plain and simple. I used to work with my pops in selling antique cars, I answered emails, ran VIN numbers, and handled payment. If anything ever fell through, it was my job to make sure money went back to the right hands. At no point were those duties my pop's responsibility even though he was the actual owner of the products.

Whoever managed the sale, needs to make it right, whether it's $10 a month for awhile or a straight refund. That person needs to understand that she "may" (I use quotes since I have no idea of actual validity) have got screwed by her business partner, but that does not give her liberty to screw her customer.

This is a classic case of business getting crossed with personal issues.

If the circumstances are true concerning the seller, then my heart goes out to you as I have had family members fall into abusive relationships before. I wish you nothing but happiness as you move on in life.
 
SofaKing said:
I have a felling Lea/Nikki created 2 other accounts, Rich, Dennis or someone might want to check and see.


What are the odds of 2 people having the same Birthday and supposedly be a year apart are involved in the same scam?!
Click to expand...

Mike, I'm not sure what you are stating or asking here. If I am reading correctly you are suggesting besides the two user names on this thread they have two more here?


I don't see any other user names associated with their information.

Also, I did take a look around at some of the other sites and Nikki has been active for years online without any complaints I can find.
 
Lea is the seller, not Nikki. I've known the two of them for a while and while I don't want to go into details Lea's claims that she was being abused should be taken with the same grain of salt as her claims that she can't refund the OP.
 
Unless the URL is incorrect, it looks like she's already deactivated her FB.
"Content not found".
 
Back
Top