Complaint Review: AuctionArms.com - Carson City Nevada

AuctionArms has received no previous communication from this customer regarding any dispute.  Disputes should be filed with [email protected].

Thomas writes:

    "This site has a seller (thelorider) that sells alot and does not tell people the facts about the products they are bidding on. He is selling police trade in pistols but he does not mention this in the description."

AA-Bob rebuts:  Yes, thelorider is a long time seller that sells a lot of items at our site, http://www.AuctionArms.com and has earned an excellent reputation (his feedback is 1989 positives, no negatives and 2 neutral feedback since November 2002).

I believe the specific auction in question here is: http://www.auctionarms.com/Search/displayitem.cfm?ItemNum=10202887.0

While this auction does not mention the source of this item, even if it is a police turn-in, we do not believe failure to mention such is a misrepresentation. The condition is described as excellent "It has the normal handling marks as the pictures show".

Thomas further states "All other site's that sell police trade-in's say so"

AA-Bob rebuts:  I sincerely doubt 1) Thomas knows "all other sites" or 2) has any evidence to support the contention "...say so", since none, to my knowledge exists. I'd be happy to review his information if he has such.

Thomas further complains:  "He has a 100% positive but that is because all messages between seller and buyer are kept private and once the seller leaves a negative feedback on the buyer the company will take the buyer off and the buyer cannot leave a negative feedback on the seller." 

AA-Bob rebuts:  thelorider has excellent feedback because he knows how to take care of his customers who purchase from him.  Thomas did not complete the sale based on:

1) failing to have asked and answered any concerns about the source of this item before bidding.  2) apparently having received the information the item might be a police trade-in then making an unsubstantiated assumption regarding the condition of all police trade ins as being inferior in some regard with out having paid for, received and inspected the item.  I do not know how he decided it was definately a Police trade-in, or if so why it would be inferior to the condition described in the auction.  However, the seller in post-auction communication mentioned he was "pretty sure they were police trade-ins".  

Our Terms and Conditions which Thomas agreed to (see https://secure.auctionarms.com/TermsNConds.cfm ) states in part:

• "Auction Arms takes no responsibility for the truth or accuracy of auction listings, or the quality, safety, or legality of any items offered at auction."

"A Buyer is:

--the highest bidder in a Basic Style Auction,"

• "A Buyer is contractually obligated by this Agreement to complete the transaction."
  
  
• "Any User whose first and only feedback is negative will be immediately disabled. "

Our Help and Information section http://www.auctionarms.com/help/helpinfo.cfm#13 gives potential bidders information on how to contact sellers with their questions.

Sellers have the ability to display as public to all users, any questions a potential bidder may have and his answers to these questions (especially helpful if it may answer other bidder's potential questions) many times the seller elects to keep these questions private as not being of interest to other bidders.  This is the Seller's choice.

Thomas sent no messages using this feature, so there was nothing from him to "keep private".  However thelorider did send Thomas 2 messages, post-auction.

Auction:   10202887 

From:  thelorider    Posted:  02/21/2011 02:36:02

.... I don't know the history of these. I bought several from a supplier and I am pretty sure they are a police trade in. They are all in excellent condition. I test fired one and decided to keep it in my personal collection. Thanks again, Tim 

Auction:   10202887 

From:  thelorider     To:  Posted:  02/21/2011 06:04:49

Thomas, I do not know for a fact these are police trade in's. If you decide not to purchase I will have to leave a negative feedback to recover the listing fee!

Thomas then declined his contractual obligation by failing to pay for the item.  A negative feedback was filed by the seller in order to recoup his auction fees.  Thomas then filed an unwarranted retaliatory negative feedback which we removed.  Our policy is that non-paying bidders are not allowed to post retaliatory feedback.  Their obligations must be completed before they have earned the right to post feedback on a transaction.  Our standard policy regarding negative feedback was applied  and Thomas' account was disabled as a non-paying bidder.

Thomas should have completed his auction obligation, paid for and received the item and, if on inspection, he was not satisfied with the condition of the item, returned it for refund under our 3 Business Day no-questions-asked return policy.  Had he taken personal responsibility for his obligations in this matter, his account would still be enabled and he would have the privilege of posting feedback as he saw fit. I  believe the issue here was simply buyer remorse, and being upset at the consequesnces of failing to take personal responsibility for his actions.

We are always willing to hear both sides of any dispute...at [email protected]. Thomas decided not to raise his side with our dispute resolution system...likely he knew what the the outcome would be.  We wish Thomas the best of luck and hope he decides to complete his promises and obligations in the future.  I'm sure he will be successful.