Bad Guy Lloyd Heilbrunn

[DaveyFig]

I agree that there should be some kind of proof to back up these claims. How are we supposed to look out for anyone if we don't know why.

He posted why. If that isn't enough for you to not buy from him until Lloyd responds, I don't know what to tell you. It doesn't look like the OP will be posting anything.

... the female came in with open sores all down the body and the tip of tail missing. Evenually found out the reason; she had a severe case of mites. Lloyd didn't dislose any of the damage and represented these as flawless. When initially confronted he didn't come clean and offer any kind of mitigation on the deal even though there was no way he could've missed the damage when shipping out. Not very straight forward dealer.

He said it has sores down its body and a missing tail tip. Posting pictures of it now wouldn't prove that Lloyd didn't tell him about that.

I don't know how it can be proven by the OP that Lloyd didn't disclose the information. Lloyd would have to say he did disclose it.

There are two old ads for adult Texas Indigo snakes posted by Lloyd here. They both have the same picture. It is a thumbnail photo of the first maybe 8 inches of one snake.

 

[DaveyFig]

I don't see a nipped tail or sores on the side, but this could be the male.

 

[Lucille]

Bought an expensive pair of texas indigos from lloyd, the female came in with open sores all down the body and the tip of tail missing. Evenually found out the reason; she had a severe case of mites.

Eventually? If the infestation was severe, wouldn't it be apparent right away?
Did you call the vet about the sores prior to discovering the mites?

 

[CJReptiles]

Lloyd is a personal friend of mine, he would have never shipped an animal with open sores.. Lloyd is a Lawyer, I will contact him tomorrow concerning this thread. Not sure but this may be slander on your part and you may suffer legal actions.. Did you even call him before running him through the trenches?

 

[Lucille]

he would have never shipped an animal with open sores.

I don't think it happened that way, either. But without more feedback from the OP, or from Lloyd, it is hard to say what is going on.

 

[Fangthane]

He posted why. If that isn't enough for you to not buy from him until Lloyd responds, I don't know what to tell you. It doesn't look like the OP will be posting anything.



He said it has sores down its body and a missing tail tip. Posting pictures of it now wouldn't prove that Lloyd didn't tell him about that.

I don't know how it can be proven by the OP that Lloyd didn't disclose the information. Lloyd would have to say he did disclose it.

There are two old ads for adult Texas Indigo snakes posted by Lloyd here. They both have the same picture. It is a thumbnail photo of the first maybe 8 inches of one snake.

While I agree that it's difficult to prove a negative, at this point, there's nothing to prove that this damage exists anywhere but in the OP's imagination. He's taunted us with the premise that he can prove his claims, but is essentially thumbing his nose at us when asked to do so. I don't understand how you can even try to defend his position. You seem to be convinced that you're not condoning his methodology, but that's definitely not how it's coming across to some of us. There's no rule that says proof is a prerequisite for starting a BOI thread, but how does the course of action that the OP has chosen make any logical sense? It just seems exceptionally irrational, which makes makes it worthy of being questioned.

 

[DaveyFig]

While I agree that it's difficult to prove a negative, at this point, there's nothing to prove that this damage exists anywhere but in the OP's imagination. He's taunted us with the premise that he can prove his claims, but is essentially thumbing his nose at us when asked to do so. I don't understand how you can even try to defend his position. You seem to be convinced that you're not condoning his methodology, but that's definitely not how it's coming across to some of us. There's no rule that says proof is a prerequisite for starting a BOI thread, but how does the course of action that the OP has chosen make any logical sense? It just seems exceptionally irrational, which makes makes it worthy of being questioned.

If you must know, I am trying to keep him from running off before Lloyd gets here. Lloyd has been notified of the thread, and will probably come and defend himself.

If the OP posts what he has and others feel that it is insufficient (and really, what could he possibly have?), then everyone will let him know that, and Lloyd will never have to say a word.

If he holds onto it until Lloyd says something, at least Lloyd will either come here and post, or ignore it all together.

We don't know that the OP will ever show his hand, but Lloyd doesn't have to show his at all if everyone is convinced that the OPs pictures don't mean it is Lloyd's fault, or that the ad didn't say "flawless" and the OP just assumed he was getting perfect snakes. For some there is NEVER enough evidence, so my hope was that Lloyd showed up before the OP was introduced that.

 

[Fangthane]

If you must know, I am trying to keep him from running off before Lloyd gets here. Lloyd has been notified of the thread, and will probably come and defend himself.

If the OP posts what he has and others feel that it is insufficient (and really, what could he possibly have?), then everyone will let him know that, and Lloyd will never have to say a word.

If he holds onto it until Lloyd says something, at least Lloyd will either come here and post, or ignore it all together.

We don't know that the OP will ever show his hand, but Lloyd doesn't have to show his at all if everyone is convinced that the OPs pictures don't mean it is Lloyd's fault, or that the ad didn't say "flawless" and the OP just assumed he was getting perfect snakes. For some there is NEVER enough evidence, so my hope was that Lloyd showed up before the OP was introduced that.

You seem to be implying that you have some reason to believe that the OP intends to play his cards. His own words strongly suggest otherwise. It's not as if we're talking about some subtle deviation from what the buyer was expecting. He was expecting flawless animals, so if he can provide the seller's pictures that show what he was supposed to receive, and then provide his own pictures that clearly display the damaged snakes, it'll be pretty hard for the seller to refute that.

What does it matter whether or not the seller shows up? If it's all as damning as the OP implies and it's laid out here for all to see, it's a nail in the coffin, either way.

I just think your reasoning just seems overly convoluted. I definitely don't get it. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[rosebud945]

If you must know, I am trying to keep him from running off before Lloyd gets here. Lloyd has been notified of the thread, and will probably come and defend himself.

If the OP posts what he has and others feel that it is insufficient (and really, what could he possibly have?), then everyone will let him know that, and Lloyd will never have to say a word.

If he holds onto it until Lloyd says something, at least Lloyd will either come here and post, or ignore it all together.

We don't know that the OP will ever show his hand, but Lloyd doesn't have to show his at all if everyone is convinced that the OPs pictures don't mean it is Lloyd's fault, or that the ad didn't say "flawless" and the OP just assumed he was getting perfect snakes. For some there is NEVER enough evidence, so my hope was that Lloyd showed up before the OP was introduced that.

This is a pretty convoluted argument! LOL!

I think that the OP should at least show us pictures of the sores, if for no other reason than to give potential customers of Lloyd a visual to go along with his warning to stay clear of Lloyd. Nothing is more effective than an image to persuade people. I am not sure why he doesn't want to at least post pictures of the snake's sores and nipped tail. I can see your point about email exchanges, Dave, but not visual evidence that the sores exist. That seems basic to me.

 

[DaveyFig]

You seem to be implying that you have some reason to believe that the OP intends to play his cards. His own words strongly suggest otherwise.

I agree. Really, I don't think he has anything you have asked for. I don't think he will show anything, but am hopeful that he would post something if Lloyd came here and called him a liar.

It's not as if we're talking about some subtle deviation from what the buyer was expecting. He was expecting flawless animals, so if he can provide the seller's pictures that show what he was supposed to receive, and then provide his own pictures that clearly display the damaged snakes, it'll be pretty hard for the seller to refute that.

The one picture that Lloyd had in both ads is a picture from 2008. Lloyd may have other pics to send, but you would think that if he did they would have been in the ad.

What does it matter whether or not the seller shows up? If it's all as damning as the OP implies and it's laid out here for all to see, it's a nail in the coffin, either way.

If the OP is being dishonest, I would rather hear it from someone that has proof of his own than guess that he is because his proof is lacking.

I just think your reasoning just seems overly convoluted. I definitely don't get it. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

There isn't much I can do about that.

 

[DaveyFig]

This is a pretty convoluted argument! LOL!

I think that the OP should at least show us pictures of the sores, if for no other reason than to give potential customers of Lloyd a visual to go along with his warning to stay clear of Lloyd. Nothing is more effective than an image to persuade people. I am not sure why he doesn't want to at least post pictures of the snake's sores and nipped tail. I can see your point about email exchanges, Dave, but not visual evidence that the sores exist. That seems basic to me.

I am sure it does sound convoluted.

I think the OP should post pictures of a nipped tail and sores as well. I doubt he will though, but I don't that it should hurt him unless Lloyd calls him out. I just want to hear an explanation or denial first.

Lloyd could come here and say he knew the snake was "damaged goods".

Lloyd could come here and say that there was nothing wrong with the snake.

Lloyd could come here and see pictures of sores and come up with an explanation or excuse before posting.

If the OP posts pictures of sores and a nipped tail, will that be proof of anything to anyone? Will anyone say "Well, there's a picture! That came from Lloyd without a doubt. Lloyd knew that the snake was damaged?"

I would rather wait. That's all. If Lloyd comes and says "Those animals were flawless" and shows (recent) pics of his own, then the OP should show what he has.

He may say "I don't need to see pictures, I know that snake is messed up, and so did the buyer, before I shipped it!"

 

[rosebud945]

I am sure it does sound convoluted.

I think the OP should post pictures of a nipped tail and sores as well. I doubt he will though, but I don't that it should hurt him unless Lloyd calls him out. I just want to hear an explanation or denial first.

Lloyd could come here and say he knew the snake was "damaged goods".

Lloyd could come here and say that there was nothing wrong with the snake.

Lloyd could come here and see pictures of sores and come up with an explanation or excuse before posting.

If the OP posts pictures of sores and a nipped tail, will that be proof of anything to anyone? Will anyone say "Well, there's a picture! That came from Lloyd without a doubt. Lloyd knew that the snake was damaged?"

I would rather wait. That's all. If Lloyd comes and says "Those animals were flawless" and shows (recent) pics of his own, then the OP should show what he has.

He may say "I don't need to see pictures, I know that snake is messed up, and so did the buyer, before I shipped it!"

In a court of law, the burden of proof is on the accuser, but in a court of law, the jury hears both sides of the argument before any proof is offered, so I guess this makes sense, still convoluted, but makes a bit more sense.

 

[DaveyFig]

In a court of law, the burden of proof is on the accuser, but in a court of law, the jury hears both sides of the argument before any proof is offered, so I guess this makes sense, still convoluted, but makes a bit more sense.

It's not THAT complicated!

I just want to hear opening statements from both sides.

 

[Suncoast Herpetological]

While I have no knowledge of this particular situation, I have dealt with Lloyd several times over the last 12 or 13 years and this definitely does not sound like him

 

[DavidBeard]

I always find something fishy about people who make accusations and refuse to provide proof at all......I have dealt with Lloyd in the past as a seller (he bought a snake from me) and he was very easy to deal with, even though this was a couple years ago.

 

[CJReptiles]

I would also like to add that the snakes were packed and shipped by Ben Seigle for Lloyd. Ben would never sent out snakes in that condition. Never...

 

[CJReptiles]

Ben Siegel.. It's early..

 

[DaveyFig]

I would also like to add that the snakes were packed and shipped by Ben Seigle for Lloyd. Ben would never sent out snakes in that condition. Never...

Well, hopefully Ben takes pictures of snakes that he is shipping for someone else before he ships them, just in case the OP does decide to show us something.

 

[CJReptiles]

Bought an expensive pair of texas indigos from lloyd, the female came in with open sores all down the body and the tip of tail missing. Evenually found out the reason; she had a severe case of mites. Lloyd didn't dislose any of the damage and represented these as flawless. When initially confronted he didn't come clean and offer any kind of mitigation on the deal even though there was no way he could've missed the damage when shipping out. Not very straight forward dealer.

Just about everything this guy has said is not truthful.

 

[DaveyFig]

Christopher, are you talking with Lloyd?