I don't bring this up lightly...

[MTA]

It certainly sounds like a wonderful cause, and I have no objection to it. In fact, I don’t even mind the group collectively deciding where the money should go if @Rare Breed should ever address all of the points I proposed. What is personally more important to me, and I believe the collective, is acknowledging wrongdoing rather than relying on claimed reputation. Thereafter, implementing a site wide solution that will help prevent similar problems in the future.

Over the last 24 hours, I have received private communications from other AH members who have had problems during their transactions with @Rare Breed. It is certainly not my place to name them since they reached out to me privately, but I did inform them that I would be mentioning it on here generally to make the point in response to certain comments that sometimes airing this information publicly is useful to preventing future buyers from experiencing the same thing. Had I known what they experienced beforehand, I would have made different choices.

We owe it to each other at minimum, and I expect to be treated like any other person on AH regardless of seniority or status.

Hey Franz, I belong to a popular gun forum for Texans and it uses a feedback system for the classifieds section.. The option to leave positive, neutral or negative feedback are available as well as commenting where folks can leave comments for that particular transaction. It has really helped out with establishing (and maintaining) credibility.

If you clicked on a user's name it would show your their feedback stats like below. I use myself as an example because of my stellar feedback stats :

and also on every post:

IMO this system is awesome because it lets me keep track of who I have done business with before. I have sold a bunch of items on here to include rifles but I cant really remember who I have sold them too without a system of record to go off of. Makes it so I have to go off of my memory (lol) to keep track of who is good to go to do business with.

Just a proposal as this feedback system enforces integrity if a member wants to stay a member and benefit from a forum. Both AH and this other forum are using Xenforo and I am curious to see how much work it is to implement this

 

[franzfmdavis]

Hey Franz, I belong to a popular gun forum for Texans and it uses a feedback system for the classifieds section.. The option to leave positive, neutral or negative feedback are available as well as commenting where folks can leave comments for that particular transaction. It has really helped out with establishing (and maintaining) credibility.

If you clicked on a user's name it would show your their feedback stats like below. I use myself as an example because of my stellar feedback stats :
View attachment 658581


and also on every post:
View attachment 658582

IMO this system is awesome because it lets me keep track of who I have done business with before. I have sold a bunch of items on here to include rifles but I cant really remember who I have sold them too without a system of record to go off of. Makes it so I have to go off of my memory (lol) to keep track of who is good to go to do business with.

Just a proposal as this feedback system enforces integrity if a member wants to stay a member and benefit from a forum. Both AH and this other forum are using Xenforo and I am curious to see how much work it is to implement this

Excellent idea! Since the forum makes no money from the classified ads, those who want could chip in something to help defray the cost of implementation if deemed useful by the forum owner/moderators.

More importantly, excellent mullet!

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

Hey Franz, I belong to a popular gun forum for Texans and it uses a feedback system for the classifieds section.. The option to leave positive, neutral or negative feedback are available as well as commenting where folks can leave comments for that particular transaction. It has really helped out with establishing (and maintaining) credibility.

If you clicked on a user's name it would show your their feedback stats like below. I use myself as an example because of my stellar feedback stats :
View attachment 658581


and also on every post:
View attachment 658582

IMO this system is awesome because it lets me keep track of who I have done business with before. I have sold a bunch of items on here to include rifles but I cant really remember who I have sold them too without a system of record to go off of. Makes it so I have to go off of my memory (lol) to keep track of who is good to go to do business with.

Just a proposal as this feedback system enforces integrity if a member wants to stay a member and benefit from a forum. Both AH and this other forum are using Xenforo and I am curious to see how much work it is to implement this

We use a very similar system here in Canada called gunpost. Same idea buyer and seller have the ability to review each other after transactions.

 

[fourfive8]

I would guess that the feedback system discussed in this thread has already kicked in.

I sold off most of my fairly large gun collection several years ago. Many old Winchester levers and some original Sharps 74s. A friend was running a small internet arts/crafts business at the time along with some Gunbroker listings. For my guns, I would write up the description and together we would photograph the guns at his shop. I went to great lengths to photograph all parts of each gun, concentrating especially on blemishes. Likewise, the photos matched the detailed write-up that included any and all flaws. The guns were then listed on Gunbroker the same day they were described and photographed. Some guns were nearly flawless with some of the older ones showing their 150 years. We put them in a soft case, double boxed them and would ship them FFL to FFL if the law required (1898 rule) or if the buyer requested. Always shipped with insurance. Return procedures were spelled out in detail on the listing or via PM during the transaction, Never an issue and maintained a 100% positive feedback… all transactions - IIRC approx 125 guns. Sales prices, either Buy It Now or High Bid, ranged from about $400 on the low side to well into 5 figures.

Sight unseen online buy and sell is a completely different animal from in-person. Online sight unseen leaves no room for error- zero. Also, no such thing as “let her ride” or “ close enough” or the absolute nonsense of, “no big deal… it’s only a couple hundred bucks in a $20,000 deal”. In the long run, sooner or later, those attitudes always come back and bite.

 

[franzfmdavis]

What you haven’t addressed in your response is your belief that Rare Breed was dishonest and deceptive. You are clearly conveying this. I simply don’t believe this to be true.

I didn’t mean to ignore this question earlier and am happy to respond.

My impression of what took place was based on multiple and consecutive actions taken by @Rare Breed:

1. Using pictures taken on December 2023 in an ad posted on December 2024. This itself is not a deceptive choice on its face, but having used the gun extensively for hunting in the interim and, most significantly, not posting pictures of the actual current condition of the gun, which clearly changed between those two dates, was deceptive in my opinion. Whether it was intentionally or unintentional is something only he knows in his heart.
2. Promising in writing that he was going to refund all of the shipping costs to us and back to him, and then going back on that promise in part after the gun was shipped back, and then in part again after the reloading supplies were shipped back, was deceptive in my opinion. Refusing to acknowledge or honor his written agreement despite being reminded of it multiple times, made it intentional in my opinion.
3. These repetitive deceptive behaviors by him collectively created a pattern, which to me appeared intentional.

Dishonesty is commonly understood as acting in a way that is false. Deceit is commonly understood as an act or practice of deception.

In this transaction, there were at least three clear instances in which I reasonably expected something to occur based on what he had written or said, but something different occurred, which only harmed me (apparently until he tried the quick fix on his gun).

As you see from my communications to him during the transaction, I continued to politely give him the benefit of the doubt in responding to his actions, that is until he cut off communication rather rudely (in my opinion).

Thereafter, the pattern of his behavior viewed in totality led me to believe that he was being dishonest and deceitful in this transaction.

 

[BJH65]

I didn’t mean to ignore this question earlier and am happy to respond.

My impression of what took place was based on multiple and consecutive actions taken by @Rare Breed:

1. Using pictures taken on December 2023 in an ad posted on December 2024. This itself is not a deceptive choice on its face, but having used the gun extensively for hunting in the interim and, most significantly, not posting pictures of the actual current condition of the gun, which clearly changed between those two dates, was deceptive in my opinion. Whether it was intentionally or unintentional is something only he knows in his heart.
2. Promising in writing that he was going to refund all of the shipping costs to us and back to him, and then going back on that promise in part after the gun was shipped back, and then in part again after the reloading supplies were shipped back, was deceptive in my opinion. Refusing to acknowledge or honor his written agreement despite being reminded of it multiple times, made it intentional in my opinion.
3. These repetitive deceptive behaviors by him collectively created a pattern, which to me appeared intentional.

Dishonesty is commonly understood as acting in a way that is false. Deceit is commonly understood as an act or practice of deception.

In this transaction, there were at least three clear instances in which I reasonably expected something to occur based on what he had written or said, but something different occurred, which only harmed me (apparently until he tried the quick fix on his gun).

As you see from my communications to him during the transaction, I continued to politely give him the benefit of the doubt in responding to his actions, that is until he cut off communication rather rudely (in my opinion).

Thereafter, the pattern of his behavior viewed in totality led me to believe that he was being dishonest and deceitful in this transaction.

Thank you for your comprehensive response and answer when you owe me no explanation whatsoever.

Addressing point No.1 in regard to the photos that did not accurately depict the double rifle. I would set this aside as evidence since the rifle was returned and your brother in law was fully refunded to his satisfaction.

Let us now merge point No.2 and point No.3 together, all regarding payment of the shipping
costs of rifle and components. Since this is the crux of the issue and why it was made public on AH, let us set aside the condition of the rifle and photos as evidence, they no longer have bearing in regard to the specific disagreement of shipping cost payment.

Rare Breed clearly changed his mind regarding full payment/reimbursement of shipping and only he can speak to that. I do not know why he would agree to pay the full coming and going shipping costs and then have a change of heart? Why? Did something happen do change his mind? It is a bad look and had you been refunded the full shipping costs we wouldn’t be having this dialogue. Rare Breed seems to have washed his hands of this affair so we may never know.

As the aggrieved party, you have every right to be upset by having to spend $500 out of pocket in lieu of your brother in law having to pay. In fact I would think it would be very normal for you or anyone in your position to feel anger and some animosity towards Rare Breed. In that context it wouldn’t be hard to formulate conclusions of deceit, dishonesty and deception towards Rare Breed.

I don’t believe it possible for you to give Rare Breed the benefit of the doubt and were I in your shoes I’d most likely feel the same way. It’s easy for me to give him the benefit of the doubt as I have lost nothing.

You are factoring the totality of everything that transpired while I’m solely confining this to Rare Breed’s agreement to pay both coming and going shipping of the rifle and components on which he abruptly changed his mind. Based on that alone, I cannot conclude with certainty that he was dishonest and deceitful.

Respectfully,

Brendon J.

 

[GuttormG]

I simply don’t believe he has proven Rare Breed to be dishonest and deceptive.

I disagree.
Photos and condition of the gun do not matter here. Seller agreed to take the gun and the reloading stuff back and refund the cost.

A man not keeping his promise is not honest.

 

[franzfmdavis]

Thank you for your comprehensive response and answer when you owe me no explanation whatsoever.

Addressing point No.1 in regard to the photos that did not accurately depict the double rifle. I would set this aside as evidence since the rifle was returned and your brother in law was fully refunded to his satisfaction.

Let us now merge point No.2 and point No.3 together, all regarding payment of the shipping
costs of rifle and components. Since this is the crux of the issue and why it was made public on AH, let us set aside the condition of the rifle and photos as evidence, they no longer have bearing in regard to the specific disagreement of shipping cost payment.

Rare Breed clearly changed his mind regarding full payment/reimbursement of shipping and only he can speak to that. I do not know why he would agree to pay the full coming and going shipping costs and then have a change of heart? Why? Did something happen do change his mind? It is a bad look and had you been refunded the full shipping costs we wouldn’t be having this dialogue. Rare Breed seems to have washed his hands of this affair so we may never know.

As the aggrieved party, you have every right to be upset by having to spend $500 out of pocket in lieu of your brother in law having to pay. In fact I would think it would be very normal for you or anyone in your position to feel anger and some animosity towards Rare Breed. In that context it wouldn’t be hard to formulate conclusions of deceit, dishonesty and deception towards Rare Breed.

I don’t believe it possible for you to give Rare Breed the benefit of the doubt and were I in your shoes I’d most likely feel the same way. It’s easy for me to give him the benefit of the doubt as I have lost nothing.

You are factoring the totality of everything that transpired while I’m solely confining this to Rare Breed’s agreement to pay both coming and going shipping of the rifle and components on which he abruptly changed his mind. Based on that alone, I cannot conclude with certainty that he was dishonest and deceitful.

Respectfully,

Brendon J.

I respect your analysis very much, and it would have been ideal, and still would be ideal, if there would be an honest conversation between he and I about this, whether in public or private. Up to this point, he has acknowledged, by choice or otherwise, that the pictures he posted were old. However, reading through his responses to this thread up to this point, he has yet to acknowledge that he ever promised to pay the full amount or explain why he changed his mind, despite clear evidence showing that. Instead, he has either avoided that question or said things are not true and easily disproved. I can only guess why, but none of those guesses are excusable.

I certainly do not want to have conflict with anyone unnecessarily. However, that is balanced against not wanting to be taken advantage of.

I said it before, and I will say it again for whatever it is worth. I would welcome a resolution of this, but it will not just involve me accepting this was some misunderstanding on my part and that the $554 I’m out was just the risk of making expensive purchases on AH.

His decision to leave this thread has not been helpful, in my opinion. There has been a significant amount of interest in this as a topic of discussion (or just a spectator sport as some have said). In any event, it has generated a large number of comments and discussions, all of which have value for me as a forum community member.

Ultimately, I hope that there is some general benefit that comes from it for the group as a whole. More specifically, I also hope that there arises some creative way to reach a resolution of the dispute between he and I.

I have laid out at at least two variations of a proposed solution. @rookhawk has generously proposed a variation on those as well. I apologize if I’ve missed other proposals that were made. In any event, its not going to be solved by one party alone.

 

[CBH Australia]

I don't know of anyone that buys a $20k car and does not test drive it. We should do the same with gun deals.....

Well, I might be the exception to that.

My current vehicle was bought without test driving, they offered a few times to test drive but I was happy to take it.

Actually I have bought a few new cars without test driving along with a couple for work.

 

[Uncontrolled_round_feed]

Well, I might be the exception to that.

My current vehicle was bought without test driving, they offered a few times to test drive but I was happy to take it.

Actually I have bought a few new cars without test driving along with a couple for work.

I’ll join ye in the exception category. Bought a couple houses back in the low interest rate days without ever seeing them in the flesh!

 

[mdwest]

I’ve gone even further…

I bought twenty acres of land and a small cabin in Colorado, based only on knowledge of the area and photos online..

Had it for almost fifteen years now.. was a great deal and we have thoroughly enjoyed it (and have bought more of the surrounding acreage)

 

[mark-hunter]

In my humble opinion, I think in this unwanted situation, best would be to negotiate new price, and seller to make partial refund of money. Buyer keeps the gun.
This is gentlemen solution.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

I didn’t mean to ignore this question earlier and am happy to respond.

My impression of what took place was based on multiple and consecutive actions taken by @Rare Breed:

1. Using pictures taken on December 2023 in an ad posted on December 2024. This itself is not a deceptive choice on its face, but having used the gun extensively for hunting in the interim and, most significantly, not posting pictures of the actual current condition of the gun, which clearly changed between those two dates, was deceptive in my opinion. Whether it was intentionally or unintentional is something only he knows in his heart.
2. Promising in writing that he was going to refund all of the shipping costs to us and back to him, and then going back on that promise in part after the gun was shipped back, and then in part again after the reloading supplies were shipped back, was deceptive in my opinion. Refusing to acknowledge or honor his written agreement despite being reminded of it multiple times, made it intentional in my opinion.
3. These repetitive deceptive behaviors by him collectively created a pattern, which to me appeared intentional.

Dishonesty is commonly understood as acting in a way that is false. Deceit is commonly understood as an act or practice of deception.

In this transaction, there were at least three clear instances in which I reasonably expected something to occur based on what he had written or said, but something different occurred, which only harmed me (apparently until he tried the quick fix on his gun).

As you see from my communications to him during the transaction, I continued to politely give him the benefit of the doubt in responding to his actions, that is until he cut off communication rather rudely (in my opinion).

Thereafter, the pattern of his behavior viewed in totality led me to believe that he was being dishonest and deceitful in this transaction.

A little deceitful ... and a whole bunch arrogant. I think that's what chapped my arse the most about this sad saga. Especially the way seller responded on the forum. Essentially "I'm not going to own up because I don't want to. End of discussion. Goodbye." I almost laughed at his arrogant logic of being so generous in the first place to send more loading components than were in the ad. So the buyer is supposed to somehow be grateful for receiving extra components for a gun he returned due to seller's misrepresentation? "Thank you so much for sending me all this extra shit that I no longer need." Whatta guy, eh? . I'm thinking seller threw in the extra components to smooth the impact of buyer opening the box to find the already overpriced double rifle he just bought was beat up. The buyer should be able to overlook taking a $10K screwing if an extra box or two of loading components show up in the mail? Pfft.

Misunderstanding? Really?

 

[318AE]

Hey guys - new world record -

First post about a California Rigby to ever make 10 pages!

 

[275r7x57]

A little deceitful ... and a whole bunch arrogant. I think that's what chapped my arse the most about this sad saga. Especially the way seller responded on the forum. Essentially "I'm not going to own up because I don't want to. End of discussion. Goodbye." I almost laughed at his arrogant logic of being so generous in the first place to send more loading components than were in the ad. So the buyer is supposed to somehow be grateful for receiving extra components for a gun he returned due to seller's misrepresentation? "Thank you so much for sending me all this extra shit that I no longer need." Whatta guy, eh? . I'm thinking seller threw in the extra components to smooth the impact of buyer opening the box to find the already overpriced double rifle he just bought was beat up. The buyer should be able to overlook taking a $10K screwing if an extra box or two of loading components show up in the mail? Pfft.

Misunderstanding? Really?

Yep! Not to mention the new oiled up pictures that do not show the damaged side of the forearm.

Covering up a mistake with another mistake. Deceitful?

 

[Andrew Short]

In my humble opinion, I think in this unwanted situation, best would be to negotiate new price, and seller to make partial refund of money. Buyer keeps the gun.
This is gentlemen solution.

I agree. I’ve been part of this forum for years and have conducted countless transactions with more members than I can count. This is a very unfortunate and unwanted situation. Obviously mistakes were made here and effort was made resolve those. I have no dog in this fight. Ultimately, it is the up to the buyer and seller to resolve issues if any should arise. This forum has no obligation to the buyer or seller to ensure product condition or perform mediation. This should not have become a public display. All very sad.

 

[275r7x57]

In my humble opinion, I think in this unwanted situation, best would be to negotiate new price, and seller to make partial refund of money. Buyer keeps the gun.
This is gentlemen solution.

Seriously?

You need to reread the OP and reeducate yourself before making that statement.

I am sorry but this is just complete blindness and ignorance.

 

[JimP]

We are never going to hear the whole truth to any of this, The buyer has buyers remorse when he saw the actual condition and we are getting all this information second hand through his brother in law.

What kind of conversations went on before the sale? What conversation went on when the buyer discovered the scratches? What was offered and just what was accepted by the buyer and seller, not through the brother in law.

All we are doing here is speculation and getting second hand on what the conversations actually were.

Trial by the WWW, this sounds more like two girls on FB.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Yep! Not to mention the new oiled up pictures that do not show the damaged side of the forearm.

Covering up a mistake with another mistake. Deceitful?

Yeah, I pointed that out to him. Let's see the other side of the fore arm. His response was "You're out of control. I fixed the damage. Look at the photo of cheek piece." What? No one said anything about the cheek piece. I said show us the restoration to damaged side of the FORE ARM. Response: silence. I've done a lot of stock restoration over the years and I can assure you the bad gouge in that fore arm was not steamed out as seller claims. It is a cut not a dent. There is no wood in a cut to restore. The only option is to sand it out (ugh!) or fill it (slightly less ugh).

 

[275r7x57]

He sold a firearm based on photos of a double rifle that truly no longer exists. Condition is everything in valuing a firearm, particularly one like a California Rigby with no real inherent name or collector interest. I have no idea if that was deception, laziness with respect to doing new photography, or a simple mistake. But the buyer has a very legitimate complaint that should have been resolved by the seller before this became a spectator sport.

Red Leg is spot on with this statement.