Dianne Johnson
New member
I also looked at Al's ad, but did not have the funds at the time though I wanted the animals in question. Even though I did not contact him about them, I knew exactly what he was offering - an incredible deal on some otherwise more expensive animals because two were essentially non-feeders. Lee got six animals for less than the price of 3 - shipping is NOT included in the cost of the animal. Even if it were in this case, he STILL got a deal on the remaining four animals. I keep Solomon Island ground boas (related to the viper boas); the female cost $75 not including shipping and is a yearling that feeds well. The male cost $40 at a show and was a neonate/juvenile non-feeder. He is alive and well though classically finicky about eating. Do I expect my money back from the dealer? No! I got exactly what I paid for. Viper boas along with others in Candoia group are not as easily cared for as some might think. They are sensitive to their environment - conditions that are too hot will easily kill them. At the very best, most dealers/breeders only offer a 48 hour guaranty. Who is to say what these snakes were subject to after Lee received them?
Al went above and beyond the call of duty by sending the $23 back to Lee (there is no proof that money was not received so far as I can tell). It is common practice to require actual PROOF that an animal is dead before sending ANY form of return on it. Anyone who issues a return without proof is overly generous compared to the accepted practices in this hobby. It is Al that is getting ripped off by Lee in my book by Lee stopping funds via the credit card company. Lee did not give Al the opportunity to fix the situation and was belligerent in the process. Lee got exactly what he paid for but still wants more. The ad clearly stated the condition of the animals and their situation. There was no guaranty - non-feeders NEVER come with one - and 4 healthy animals by Lee's own words that are still far less than the current market value when divided by the cost.
Dianne Johnson
Al went above and beyond the call of duty by sending the $23 back to Lee (there is no proof that money was not received so far as I can tell). It is common practice to require actual PROOF that an animal is dead before sending ANY form of return on it. Anyone who issues a return without proof is overly generous compared to the accepted practices in this hobby. It is Al that is getting ripped off by Lee in my book by Lee stopping funds via the credit card company. Lee did not give Al the opportunity to fix the situation and was belligerent in the process. Lee got exactly what he paid for but still wants more. The ad clearly stated the condition of the animals and their situation. There was no guaranty - non-feeders NEVER come with one - and 4 healthy animals by Lee's own words that are still far less than the current market value when divided by the cost.
Dianne Johnson