Bad Guy Sellers Beware of John Franco!

[guruza]

are you trying to compare that to poss? lol poss is common knowledge regardless of price. No one jumps in brand new spending that kind of money on a gecko that he was looking for obviously to breed. That kinda blows ur argument out of the water. no one is legitimately thinking poss means positively. And you can hardly guess that they are all her friends. I guess that since every person here shares your views they are all the buyers friends right?

 

[JButera]

And if she was trying to be dishonest, why not just guarantee the gecko a female when he asked? Obviously that wouldve made it so this thread never happened. The only reason people think shes a bad seller is because she was honest about how accurate her guess at it being a female was.

Wouldn't say dishonest, more like sneaky. I think she's a bad seller based on how she handled this situation. She hid behind her TOS the whole time, acting as if there was nothing she can do. imo That's where she blew it.

 

[MrTPlush]

She posted it on her personal Facebook account so yes I am to assume everyone is friends of her.

 

[guruza]

i was just on there and there is nothing stopping anyone from posting on her personal account. so the argument that they are all her friends is invalid.

 

[Snake-Queen]

i was just on there and there is nothing stopping anyone from posting on her personal account. so the argument that they are all her friends is invalid.

The she has changed it since I was there. I couldn't post on her account of the situation when this first started.

Also, who is to say she hasn't deleted comments from those whose opinion is like ours? That is what makes Facebook unreliable … she can delete those opinions that are not like hers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[guruza]

doesnt matter if shes deleting ur comments since urs are here. I doubt she has hundreds of fake accounts posting the comments that are similar to mine. You saying noone but me has this opinion is quite obviously false. infact, id say there are more people whove posted my views than people thatv posted yours.

 

[JButera]

Sorry for going a bit off topic, but can't these geckos be sexed by candling? The BD, dwarf monitor and skink keepers been doing it for years. I hear the flashlight app on most iPhones works perfectly. Some have said they've achieved 100% accuracy in every case, verified later by breeding events.

 

[CwnAnnwn]

Can I ask a favor of everyone here? Could we just tone it down a little?

Mr. Stephenson, I am assuming Mr, even though I know 4 Sam's that are not boys.

We are not here to bully you. We are also not here to kill the messenger.

I get your point. Normally, I will stand up and defend TOS until the day I die. I believe in TOS and I think you are insane to do business with out one.

But TOS is Terms of Service.

Service, to me, in the terms of selling and breeding reptiles is as follows:

1.) Raising healthy animals.
2.) Being honest and forth right with customers.
3.) Creating happy customers.

No question the animal seems healthy.

Was she honest and forthright with customers, well only after she took the money. I don't think she is a bad person, just made a mistake. And the customer is not happy that he could not get a straight answer out of her until after she took the money.

Now, how did she handle the problem.

Well first she wanted to keep the whole 300. How she wants to keep the 150. Providing a service does not mean you have to be honest after you take their money. Providing an honest service is being honest before you take their money. There is no clear winner here. So we have to make both sides whole. You state that she should keep the whole 150.

Did the buyer screw up, yes he did.
Did the seller screw up, yes they did.

Most of us here find that the buyer screwed up to the tune of 150 dollars.
The seller screw up to the tun of 150 dollars.

Which means they break even.

But she is keeping the 150 dollars for her mistake. A mistake anyone could have done. But does not give her the right to keep money on.

 

[Black Adder]

doesnt matter if shes deleting ur comments since urs are here. I doubt she has hundreds of fake accounts posting the comments that are similar to mine. You saying noone but me has this opinion is quite obviously false. infact, id say there are more people whove posted my views than people thatv posted yours.

Unfortunately at this time not a single one has graced this forum besides yourself which I commend you for standing your ground on your viewpoint and not getting irate either as others have done when they could not convince the "audience" to see their view.
Maybe you could ask some of the facebook posters to come to her defence here although I guess it is mostly irrelevant at this stage as what is done is done and she is presently $150 richer.

 

[Snake-Queen]

doesnt matter if shes deleting ur comments since urs are here. I doubt she has hundreds of fake accounts posting the comments that are similar to mine. You saying noone but me has this opinion is quite obviously false. infact, id say there are more people whove posted my views than people thatv posted yours.

I never said she created fake accounts & not sure where you got that from.

I did see many on her FB post that agreed with her, what was suspicious, none that disagreed with her.

Everyone is allowed their opinion, difference is that unlike on FB, it cannot be deleted here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[guruza]

He even cuts and pastes the text from her ad that says POSS female and sends it to her. He had to have read what he copied and pasted.

There is one that agrees he read it.

 

[guruza]

The first payment when a payment plan is established is the deposit, usually 25% of the price plus shipping. Everything after that is a payment towards paying off the animal. Most sellers i know including myself have the rule of a 25% non refundable deposit, imo it's pretty standard. Now since we all write our own tos the terms can be changed if we decide the situation warrants it. Like this case, it's up to the seller to decide if she wants to bend her own rules to make the buyer happy. When the first money was sent the buyer agreed to her tos.

Same person but the same views.

 

[guruza]

I think misrepresentation is too strong a claim here thanks to the ad. Further, unless it is actually a male, either possible female or outright female is technically correct, but the latter has not been determined yet (and so should not be stated because its correctness is currently unknown) and the former was stated in the beginning via the ad. I suspect the buyer overlooked it in excitement.

The conversation was highly suggestive with the usage of feminine descriptors up to the point of dispute, however, and that is why I added my little bit in post number six. A similar approach to one you might take for security and clarity. A few words here and there to hopefully save some stess.

Id say this is number 2

 

[guruza]

Judging by the responses read here, there are alot of people responding on this thread that dont participate in the Chahoua, or even gecko community.

"Possible Females" are sold all the time, hell, even unsexable animals are sold at a higher price than a known male because it could turn out to be a female.

15gms, no pores, is a pretty good chance that the animal is a female. Pores can pop up in the mid 20's, but rare, and thats the risk all people take when buying at that stage in development. Thats just the way it is.

I feel like anyone willing to spend 650 for a young gecko showing no pores knows exactly what they are getting into. If that thing was a proven female at 2 years old its going to cost $1000. I think the offers that the buyer was making clearly indicates he knew the risk involved and wanted to minimize such risk.

Number 3 and i dont feel like quoting any more messages. This is just from the first several pages.

 

[Pasodama]

The seller clearly labeled the gecko as possibly female. There was no need to keep reinforcing it as she obviously thought the buyer actually read the ad. And the seller kept her word by following through with her TOS as many of you guys obviously wouldn't have just to appease to one incompetent buyer. Her TOS are her rules and you cant get mad at someone for following the clear cut rules they made themselves. The seller did not intentionally mislead anyone. She simply referred to the gecko as the gender she believed it to be. She believed it enough to call it a she, but not tenough to guarantee it 100%.

There are cases, &/or circumstances, where I have/would back an entity due to their TOS. When it was/is merited.
This is not one of those cases &/or circumstances.
Even a TOS is subject to different circumstances.

Just because a seller has a TOS does not mean that they have free rein to do whatever they want, or whatever it takes to make a sale, or to commit serious errors, etc., etc., with the expectation that, no matter what they do, they have the automatic standing to enforce their TOS.

....

 

[guruza]

So you believe its ok for the buyer to just read the title before sending the cash? Because there was nothing misleading about the ad. The term poss female is right in there. Its not hidden or anything and anyone who actually took the time to read the ad knew it was poss female. For you to try and claim she was being deceptive is nonsense. You cant exactly be deceptive when the truth is sitting right there in plain text. But on the other hand i can call the buyer irresponsible as he obviously did not even bother reading past the very first line of the ad.

 

[odduc748]

At this point, I'm confused as to why the seller would not simply admit to a mistake, refund the money and move on.

Now, the seller will have a serious integrity issue because of this long thread.

As a business practice, it just makes sense to apologize even if you firmly believe you're right. There is no shame in humility.

 

[nickolasanastasiou]

Id say this is number 2

To that end, let us be sure to keep it in full context.

I think the ad had the "poss" qualifier and so I do not believe the animal and its sex were misrepresented. I do believe further use of feminine pronouns made for an unwise degree of ambiguity (addressed by myself as well as others) and that this could have been handled better via neutral pronouns and/or with clarifying statements from the seller to correct feminine descriptions by the buyer so that both were clearer on the nature of the animal in the transaction. I do believe putting possible or probable in the title would have been the wiser way to label so it hits one in the face upon first glance. I do believe the language suggested female more than it should have, but the qualifying label was present. I am not a fan of cherry-picking either bit of information. The matter of pores was also mentioned in the ad in conjunction with the "poss female" portion of the description. I am guessing someone familiar with the species would/should understand the gravity of that in context.

I do not believe a person seeing the seller's side of things is bad, is a friend, or has ulterior motives. Simply a difference in perspective compared to others. I have two perspectives here that are not in agreement, but that is how I think often enough. I do not have to choose only one, either, but a course of action, were I in the situation, requires that I work this into some practical construct for a way forward since I cannot just perform two negating actions to have a null result (otherwise, there is no point in doing anything).

I do believe that the seller may be within her terms for keeping a portion of the amount sent to her. I do not believe that keeping any portion of that amount is the wise thing to do in this situation. I do believe there is more to be lost than there is to be gained by keeping the money in this situation.

 

[Snake-Queen]

This all comes down to what one would do in this situation.
I breed and sell my own reptiles. I would not be able to keep the buyers money in this situation. I would see that I made an error & refund all money entirely.

Many buyers do not read the whole ad, or skim over it. If skimmed, one mention of it being poss female amidst 6 mentions of she/her is easily overlooked.

Here is a question for you, Sam … what would you do?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[juliasara]

I'm not defending either party, just simply making an observation, the whole he/she thing has been tough for me when it comes to an animal that is not old/big enough to accurately sex yet. Personally it's hard for me to call a living creature it and the few times I have people have actually said something along the lines of a living creature isn't an "it" so I've always struggled with how to refer to unsexed critters. I try to always say he/she but when I'm in a rush or not fully paying attention I sometimes say she or he (depending on which it most likely is). I guess I need to be more aware of what I say. Maybe I'm weird but calling any living thing "it" just feels wrong to me. Now as for the deposit I personally would just return the whole thing, it's not worth the headache. If there was more evidence that the buyer wronged me maybe I would be more likely to not budge on my tos but all we really have here is our opinions of the real reason the buyer backed out. If I had to pay to post any of my ads I might keep that amount, I believe that's only fair but beyond that the seller didn't lose anything.