[Closed] Moral dilemma re sold frame..

was the shock in the pictures and removed afterwards?

[b]wysiwyg [/b]
or not... 😀

wysiwyg

Username win.

🙂

EDIT: too slow... 😉

It was the stock picture off the website. I just put as pictured excluding shock

Saw the ad you were clear enough..

J

Ha. I see what you did there.

It arrives today and he's asking where's the shock?

I sold a set of Marzocchi forks on pinkbike. Clearly stated in the ad they had a tapered steerer. Drove up from Glasgow to Perth and met the guy in a carpark. As I was driving away I looked in the mirror and saw him staring quizzically at the forks.

By the time I got home he had them advertised on Pinkbike for £25 less than he paid me...

I suspect someone saw a bargain, didn't read the text and now realises what's happened.

I think you've got every right to stand your ground.

http://m.pinkbike.com/buysell/1559839/

That's the ad.
So methinks I should apologize and say I'm sorry but I'm afraid you've made a mistake. Also I have a lovely CCDB In just the right length..

I was with you until you said methinks... Now I reckon you owe him a full refund.

I was with you until you said methinks... Now I reckon you owe him a full refund.

Like.

Duh, [i]obviously[/i] [u]ex[/u]cluding is one of those special words, isn't it - means the same as [u]in[/u]cluding - just like flammable/inflammable

That advert is clear enough, as mentioned offer them your shock and see what they say.

So methinks I should apologize and say I'm sorry but I'm afraid you've made a mistake.

You have nothing to apologise for.

Let me rephrase your post:

You've made a mistake.

It's not so much a dilemma as a unlemma, this

Where's the shock?

Depends how sarky you want to be?

"It's right here. As the advert says, you need to get your own"

I has slight sympathy with the buyer as I thought he could have overlooked the bit about the shock but now, having seen your ad, the fact that the ad is about 10 words really doesn't leave that as an explanation.

"Where's the shock?"
...
"You know that feeling you got when you opened the package...., there, right there it is"

If he couldn't read your advert through to the end, and then understand the words, he shouldn't be allowed to spend money online.

If it looks to good to be true it probably is. A brand new frame and shock for £350 ?

Its clear but the message is[b] CAPS LOCK AND EMBOLDEN ANYTHING IMPORTANT[/b]

their problem

The ad is slightly ambiguous. It could be read as "everything is as the pic but the shock is different". The "You need a 210x57" doesn't really make much sense to someone not used to full bounce bikes. The buyer has a point, but he paid Gift, right?

How did it come to be called Pinkbike?

I don't think its 100% clear. If you dont read it carefully, It could be read, as picture but with a different shock a 210x57. If I'm selling I never use stock photos, what you see is what you get.

If you dont read it carefully

So not the op's fault then 😉

Not realy the op's fault but people often skim over things. After seeing a picture of a frame and shock thats what sticks in their mind, the rest becomes blah, blah, blah. A picture of the actual frame and a description saying
FRAME ONLY NO SHOCK leaves no room for doubt.

[i]I don't think its 100% clear. If you dont read it carefully, It could be read, as picture but with a different shock a 210x57. If I'm selling I never use stock photos, what you see is what you get. [/i]

This.

If I'd been a buyer I'd have asked, but tbh based on the crap English and stock picture I'd have just assumed it was dodgy anyway.

If I'd been a buyer I'd have asked, but tbh based on the crap English and stock picture I'd have just assumed it was dodgy anyway.

Agreed. How much time did you take to compose that advert? You needed a little more! You stated the facts but your grammatical ineptitude does not make it as clear as it could have been. The last sentence could be understood to mean that what is on offer is exactly like the picture except the shock which is different.

I would agree that the wording / grammar is a rather slack however it seems clear enough to me that there is no shock. The clue is in the phrase "You need....". Quite clearly that means this is something you will need to buy.

Another school day for the buyer then - read carefully what you think you are buying. From his response so far I would imagine most days are school days for him. 🙂

Despite what the STW asshats say about the advert, it's pretty damn clear that it needs a shock.

No dilemma. Clearly says no shock.

You would have to be a bit special to think otherwise.

[quote=convert ]How much time did you take to compose that advert? You needed a little more! Obviously not - he made the sale.

Your fault IMO. You post a picture of a frame with a shock and don't actually state anywhere that it doesn't come with one, only that it's different from the photo.

For someone reading the advert without reading this thread, I can see exactly why they would be puzzled.

It was a misleading ad with the shock being pictured.
Up to you what you do now......

Do I get the Ti spring if I buy your M6?
(and I REALLY want to buy your m6 😀 )

convert » How much time did you take to compose that advert? You needed a little more!
Obviously not - he made the sale.

Caveat Emptor

It's not the worst ad I have seen on PB however it does say...Excluding shock..... and....you will need....

The image is misleading and like it or not, most people just look at a pic and think yeah that's what I need.

The buyer F'ed up and the nice thing to do is offer a refund. If you decide not to do that I think the ad is clear enough that you have every right to refuse. Your call at the end of the day.

He's daft for not reading it properly. Not your problem. Might be a bit cheeky to offer him the shock for it though.

Rorschach. Yes you do.

I've replied to him with no result thus far.

Is this the Comm6 new at 350?

I think the wording is clear. Buyer mistake.

An idiot would see the advert as saying the" frame for sale looks like the picture apart from the shock" [i]wonder what the actual shock looks like[/i]

Or a fool would see the advert as "£375 for a brand new Commencal Supreme" [i]but it buy it aggghhhh, I can't be parted within my money quick enough..[/i]

a person of normal intelligence sees it as a badly written advert with a stock photo posted by someone too lazy to do a proper advert but reads that no shock included, which is confirmed by the price really.

Tell the buyer to suck it up but be more mindful next time.

Could you not have add 'Excluding shock' in the title of the ad? I'd also have made it clearer to idiots that a shock was not included, so [b]'PLEASE NOTE THERE IS NO SHOCK INCLUDED WITH THIS FRAME'[/b]

Is all the abuse regarding grammar really necessary? The op just wanted a few opinions on whether the add was misleading not whether he failed GCSE English.

When it comes to situations like this, if I have a feeling a might have cocked up and duped, intentionally or otherwise, someone into spending more than the item is worth, then I offer a refund or part refund. If on the other hand you believe what you sold was worth the price they paid you then they should be able to sell it on again if they are really unhappy. Looking at the description, you do state it doesn't come with a shock so if you can hand on heart say you were not out to deceive then stand your ground.

I sold a road bike I had bought just for one event. I paid 200 for it and sold it for 350, I felt bad to have made a profit on something that imo was not worth 350 but that's how auctions go. In the end the guy complained that the frame was more marked than he expected, I had tried to show everything in pics but because I felt bad I offered a 50 pound part refund. He was happy, I was more comfortable and all was good with the world, until I got the eBay seller fees that is 🙂

It could have been made a lot clearer the shock wasn't included either in the title as mentioned or bold in capitals at the start of the description. It is there however but stuck right at the end of the advert.

Pretty much what jj2k just said.

You dont owe him a foc shock, but tryoing to sort it out nicely would bethe right thing to do. Apologise if there was a misunderstanding created but the ad said no shock and £350 is a fair price for an as new without shock frame of this type. Offer him the shock at a fair price too, or offer a return if he'd prefer, life's too short to get in dumb arguments and we all f'up occasionally. Resell it and move on.

Out of interest - if you are selling the shock too, why did you split them in the first place?

I think it's obvious that the shock was not included.

I think the ad is piss poor, but I would see it as a frame only, no shock sale.
That said I have learnt never to underestimate how stupid some people actually are so would have been more specific to save any potential confusion.

Did they buy from the pinkbike ad or your STW ad? The STW says EXC shock. Have they thought EXC is a brand or type of shock?

My daughter, 10 said that there's obviously no shock included as it says so

The buyer has made a mistake.

Is all the abuse regarding grammar really necessary? The op just wanted a few opinions on whether the add was misleading not whether he failed GCSE English.

The ad created confusion for the (admittedly low IQ or naive) buyer. IMO the poor english would have contributed to this so yes, commenting on the quality of the grammar is absolutely relevant.

This is no different to SC showing their frames with Kashima and then asking you to pay for upgrade.

Point is buyer must have known as price would've been quite a bit more with shock?

WYSIWYG, this is why I don't deal in price sensitive element of the world. They expect more for less. (Not that I'm in the habit of bike part sales.)

but your grammatical ineptitude does not make it as clear as it could have been.

What I really meant was the tone of the grammatical criticism. It could have been worded in a much less antagonistic way maybe? I am sure you wrote it with a smile on your face and would have used the same terminology should you have met the OP face 2 face, even if he was built like a brick outhouse 🙂

[i]Exactly like picture excluding shock (you need a 200x57)[/i] could [u]possibly[/u] mean that it comes with a different make / model of shock; but I personally think it's obvious that the shock is not included.

I would have thought that an advert for a full suspension frame that didn't specify the shock details; an obvious question would be to ask what it did come with.

If the buyer was unhappy, I would personally refund on the basis that they paid for the postage back and also that the refund would only go through once the frame had returned in the same condition it went out.

I wouldn't be refunding on the basis that the advert was wrong though, just that I would think it was the right thing to do.

I am sure you wrote it with a smile on your face and would have used the same terminology should you have met the OP face 2 face, even if he was built like a brick outhouse

I would have said it exactly the same way I typed it. It does help that I am built like the size of two brick outhouses 🙂 (and I've a lovely personality that allows me to be cheeky to all and sundry 😉 )

*you don't have to look through too much of my posting history to find huge grammatical gaffs; but I do try to be slightly more accurate and professional when money is changing hands.

Fair play convert, I on the other hand am built like a short podgy thing but being northern I do tend to speak rather openly as well.

Do we have an outcome then?

Personally think it's obvious.

I'd not accept a return, but if I was feeling generous I'd offer an 80% refund or something along those lines based on my inconvenience.

No reply from buyer so I assume he's realised he can't read and I can't write.

Re my grammar, it's pinkbike, I'm not writing a dissertation.

Maybe he couldn't understand your reply.

I'm not writing a dissertation.

LOL, very good 🙂