ADVICE

Share information regarding your recently completed deals with other ham operators. ONLY BUYERS AND SELLERS directly involved with the transaction can post in this forum. If you have a report of a scam by someone pretending to be a ham, please post in the Scammer Reports forum instead.
Forum rules
As of Dec 9, 2013: ONLY BUYERS AND SELLERS directly involved with a transaction can post here. Do not post replies in any topic if you are not the buyer or seller in the transaction being discussed! If you believe you can help the buyer or seller, please use the Private Message system to communicate with them. NOTE: if you have been scammed by someone pretending to be a ham, please post in the Scammer Reports forum instead. See viewtopic.php?f=2&t=136 for additional rules.
Post Reply
kc0kbp
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:59 pm

ADVICE

Post by kc0kbp »

:( Gentleman, I have a strange situation here, I am on unfamiliar ground, and I need help. I offered a swap to a person that was running an ad on the board, and he took the offer. It was his 757GX for my DX-70. we had swapped photos, and agreed to do a UPS shipment on the same day, and insured both rigs for $400.00. When the Yaesu arrived I was excited to give it a try. The outer box had encountered some trauma, but it did not look too bad. When I un-packed the rig, and hooked it up, to test it, there was ZERO power out. I checked the manual, to see that all the settings and switches were in the proper locations, and I fiddled with the settings for a bit before giving up. When I got home I e-mailed the sender, to see if there was something that I was missing, and to politely ask if he had intentoinally sent out a non-functioning rig. I was assured that it was up to specs (as the rig had just come back from K4ICL) . Al told me a couple of things to check, which i did and e-mailed the ham that i got the rig from and told him of my findings. At that time I got a rude e-mail stating that there was only 1 thing that it could be(the "linear " switch in back of the rig) and that I should start a claim with UPS. I did that and the rig went back to UPS for inspection, and then (much to my surprise) BACK TO THE ORIGINAL SHIPPER. Now my dilemma is that this ham has my DX-70, and the damaged Yaesu. He has refused to send my rig back until he is compensated for his Yaesu, by UPS OR Myself. I asked him last night what his reasoning was and he is refusing to explain that to me. What I am worried about is that I have NO input to UPS, and I am not authorized to any of the claim info, so that if the claim is denied, due to negligence on his part, I will never know. And I would have to pay him $400.00 to get my rig back.I do not want to stain any-ones reputation, thats why this ham is going (at this time) UN-NAMED. What do you guys think that I should do? Post here or if you need any more info, ask. Thanks and I look forward to hearing your input. Cheers Bob kc0kbp
kc0kbp
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:59 pm

UPDATE

Post by kc0kbp »

Here is an example of the last E-mail I sent and his reply. I am choosing to omit his name at this time till I get some feed-back, Cheers. Bob kc0kbp

XXXXXXX, Actually getting the DX-70 back would suit me even better. I
just got off the phone with UPS, and I was informed that the claim info
was sent out to you yesterday..Mar 21st. Depending on how your account
is set up, you either should have, or will recieve the claim info soon.
The rig DID go to a UPS claims inspector AFTER leaving my posession. So
your accusation of my "lack of respect" for the equipment is TOTALLY
UN-founded, and un-called for, as someone else has un-packed it and
re-packed it after leaving my posession. You should have been able to
see that by the way the DX-70 was packed, I took pains to see that the
rig got to you in good order. As far as you waiting for the UPS people
to make good, before sending the DX-70 back does not make any sense to
me. You have the Yaesu...You are the person that is in communication
with UPS... You are not satisfied with the sub-standard performance of
the DX-70...You, being the shipper, have ALL the control with the claims
process, WHY will you not send the rig back?? I have ZERO input as far
as UPS is concerned and it is all up to YOU. The only info that I could
get from UPS was how the claims process is conducted, and when YOU are
notified of the findings of the claims inspector. If you remember I
stated in one of my earlier e-mails, I said that "If you are
un-satisfied with the swap, for any reason I would be happy to trade
back" It appears that you are un-happy with the rig that you recieved,
so why keep it? UPS damaged the Yaesu, you get compensation from them.
WHY keep a sub-standard rig that you are not happy with, when you hold
ALL the cards to be getting a claim from UPS, why should I be out my
Alinco?? This does NOT make sense to me. Please explain your reasoning
to me, as I am very confused to your reasons. Thanks, and PLEASE let me
know. Bob

Bob,

I am not playing email ping pong with you. As stated, as soon as I get
compensated for my 757 GX by UPS OR you, then you will bet your Alinco back.
GoodBye. XXXXXXX
K4ICL
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 1:07 pm
Location: Greenville, SC
Contact:

Regarding UPS claim situation...

Post by K4ICL »

Bob:

I respectfully council you to give the other party time to work the claim with UPS before doing anything else. It takes from ten to twenty days to process a claim and then another ten days to get the check cut and sent to the shipper.

The other party, apparently, has put in a damage claim and all concerned have no choice but to wait for UPS to formalize the claim and send it to the insurance company they use. Once the insurance company gets the paperwork from UPS, things move fairly quickly.

Also, I strongly suggest that you keep the communications lines open.

I don't believe there is malicious behavior going on, just some miscommunication, perhaps.

Regards,

K4ICL
KC0UKR
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Missouri

Post by KC0UKR »

Thanks
I am sorry to take the time to communicate with the O.P. when the post is just deleted at will.

The fact that the guy will not discuss it with him is certainly "Mis-communication".
w7apm
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 5:53 am

Post by w7apm »

Why is my post and others missing from this thread?

Marty
kc0cf
Posts: 82
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 9:54 pm
Location: Iowa
Contact:

My 2 cents worth

Post by kc0cf »

It seems to me that Bob MAY be putting the cart before the horse. If the claim has been filed with ups, and it's a valid claim it will take some time for the claim process to be completed. Let ups settle the claim send a check and I'll bet your trade will be released. In my expierence people for the most part are honest, and having one's reputitation challenged before he has had the chace to do the right thing isn't right either. For what it's worth! Michael KC0CF
kc0kbp
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:59 pm

Post by kc0kbp »

Michael, Thanks for your opinion, I would like to point out that no-ones reputation has been challenged at this time. As far as the claim is concerned, BOTH parties factually know that the claim, indeed has been filed, the package inspected, investigation closed, and the results forwarded to the shipper.For those not familiar with the claims process, this is the way things usually progress. If the claim is found to indeed be valid, the value of the damaged item must be proven by the shipper, once that is done, compensation is then sent to the shipper. I was informed by a supervisor at UPS that the process from start to finish is usually complete in about 2 weeks. Depending, of course, on the shippers promptness in providing proof of value. This claim was started on March 17, 2006. Fortunately, my Family and I are going away for Spring Break this week, so it is just as well, because I was instructed by the other party to "Please refrain from contacting me," as I would be the first to know of any news from UPS, and "I am not going to play email ping pong with you" And I do not have a phone # to call him, So, he has left me NO choice but to use this medium to vent a bit of steam. I wanted to see what the rest of the Amateur community has to say about this dilemma,as legal advice has informed me that as soon as this party recieves notification of the UPS decision, granting or denying the claim, that holding my radio, is ILLEGAL. It has been helpful, and appreciated, that I have gotten feedback from others that have had similar experiences. I sincerely pray that this matter is resolved by the time that I am back from our vacation, and no further action on my part will be deemed necessary. If the right thing is done, then this thread and all its comments will be deleted. Thanks All ,and God Bless
kb9vxq
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 4:38 am
Location: central illinois

Re: My 2 cents worth

Post by kb9vxq »

kc0cf wrote:It seems to me that Bob MAY be putting the cart before the horse. If the claim has been filed with ups, and it's a valid claim it will take some time for the claim process to be completed. Let ups settle the claim send a check and I'll bet your trade will be released. In my expierence people for the most part are honest, and having one's reputitation challenged before he has had the chace to do the right thing isn't right either. For what it's worth! Michael KC0CF
Michael, yes you are correct. A claim has been filed with UPS but maybe you should re-read the very first post again. In it you'll see he never mentioned anyones name or callsign so how is that challenging anyones reputation? I read it as he was asking for advice because it seems he got rude answers to questions from the person he is dealing with.
N4ATS
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:06 pm

Post by N4ATS »

What does him keeping the radio (DX-70) have to do with any of it ? It is a plain fact the rig did not work when received either by shipping (which is doubtful) or intent to sell a non working radio. An honest ham would do what I would , send the DX-70 back , when the check from UPS comes in , buy the DX-70 again. This "holding on" to ones trading until compensation is offered by UPS is a bunch of crap. Been there , done that. Another thing , if the box was damaged and the radio was damaged in transit , what does this have to do with the DX-70? Nothing , Seems the packing was not sufficient.

For anyone holding on to ones exchange (being that is was an equal trade) until they are "compensated" for a damage that was not caused by the other, holds in more than whats on the true surface of the deal.
73's from:
N4ATS
18.133 Mhz.
www.n4ats.com
N4ATS
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:06 pm

Post by N4ATS »

P.S. , you can bet one thing , the DX-70 has been installed , used and liked OR it has been sold already and thats why the claim is in for the $400 to pay for it.
73's from:
N4ATS
18.133 Mhz.
www.n4ats.com
wa4cch
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 2:42 am
Location: YULEE FLORIDA

Post by wa4cch »

:shock: well it looks to me that he has taken your radio and is holding it for ransom it's not your fault ups damaged his radio thats what he insured it for
why would he even want your radio if it is not what he wants to me it almost sounds like theft by taking :evil: i hope he gets his claim solved quickley my last claim with UPS took one year and three months till i got my check and this was for a radio i shipped that was bubble wraped two roll's then packed in peanuts put in a new box and then more peanuts and double boxed ........
i had another claim with them that was turned down because they said i shipped it in a used box and used box's loose half thier strength so it was not strong enough to have been shipped in that's thier story i asked the guy how many box's do you get a day that are used no answer from him

73 gud luck chuck
N8QBY
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:11 pm
Location: Michigan

Advice...

Post by N8QBY »

KC0KBP... Bob, I understand your concern. Most honest hams would not operate business in this manner. This guy is making it look like he will keep your Alinco if things don't go his way. I hope this is not the case. His e-mail to you was plain ignorant at best. Something just doesn't feel right here.
All that you can do is wait and follow up on the UPS claim. Unfortunately, this may take awhile, so don't be overly eager. Hang tough and enjoy your spring break. If after the claim process is over with, and he still won't return your Alinco, then there are other options open to you. Let's hope it doesn't come to that. 73............Pat N8QBY
K4ICL
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 1:07 pm
Location: Greenville, SC
Contact:

Here are some home truths.

Post by K4ICL »

The moment Bob and the other fellow came to terms about their deal, the ownership of Bob's old rig changed to the other fellow and the ownership of the other fellow's rig changed over to Bob. Remember, it is not the posession of the item than causes ownership, it is the agreement to exchange one value for another value that causes ownership. That why it is called trading.

This means that the other fellow was shipping Bob's "new" rig and Bob was shipping the other fellow's "new" rig. Ownership had changed and the ONLY obligation each had to the other was to pack the the other's equipment properly and ship it in a timely manner, per the agreed to shipping arrangements.

This was done.

When Bob's new rig arrived, apparently, it had suffered some damage. It is now Bob's mission to secure suitable amount of damage claim funds to get his radio repaired. It is not the other fellow''s fault the radio was damaged, it was the carrier's fault.

Most unfortunately, the carrier, UPS, REQUIRES that all claim documentation come from the original shipper. This puts an additional burden on the fellow trading with Bob. He has to make all the claim arrangements for a radio that does not even belong to him.

The other fellow, satisfied with his new radio (Bob's old radio), has no obligation to send it back to Bob as a good faith gesture. He is doing what any good ham would do, he is doing the administrative work to get Bob's claim settled. There is no breach of contract, no broken agreement, no act of dishonesty.

He is doing what he should be doing. Nothing more and nothing less.

K4ICL
KC0UKR
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Here are some home truths.

Post by KC0UKR »

K4ICL wrote:The moment Bob and the other fellow came to terms about their deal, the ownership of Bob's old rig changed to the other fellow and the ownership of the other fellow's rig changed over to Bob. Remember, it is not the posession of the item than causes ownership, it is the agreement to exchange one value for another value that causes ownership. That why it is called trading.

This means that the other fellow was shipping Bob's "new" rig and Bob was shipping the other fellow's "new" rig. Ownership had changed and the ONLY obligation each had to the other was to pack the the other's equipment properly and ship it in a timely manner, per the agreed to shipping arrangements.

This was done.



When Bob's new rig arrived, apparently, it had suffered some damage. It is now Bob's mission to secure suitable amount of damage claim funds to get his radio repaired. It is not the other fellow''s fault the radio was damaged, it was the carrier's fault.

Most unfortunately, the carrier, UPS, REQUIRES that all claim documentation come from the original shipper. This puts an additional burden on the fellow trading with Bob. He has to make all the claim arrangements for a radio that does not even belong to him.

The other fellow, satisfied with his new radio (Bob's old radio), has no obligation to send it back to Bob as a good faith gesture. He is doing what any good ham would do, he is doing the administrative work to get Bob's claim settled. There is no breach of contract, no broken agreement, no act of dishonesty.

He is doing what he should be doing. Nothing more and nothing less.

K4ICL
Somehow you seem to be saying this as though it is the gospel or something?
Is this your take on the deal or a considered legal opinion?

I for one find this interpretation odd and narrow, serving one interest at the expense of the other to say the least and it certainly does not reflect the common feelings of the others who have posted about this before you.

There are so many examples that argue against your sentiment that I have a hard time even outlining them,it seems absurd to me that anyone could support this view let alone that it would be a legal position.

Can you explain or enlighten us here and without deleting this post?

I really am asking with all due respect.
Ed Harris
K4ICL
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 1:07 pm
Location: Greenville, SC
Contact:

Go for it...

Post by K4ICL »

There are so many examples that argue against your sentiment that I have a hard time even outlining them,
Go for it, Ed. I want to read them all.

K4ICL
KC0UKR
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Here are some home truths.

Post by KC0UKR »

K4ICL wrote:The moment Bob and the other fellow came to terms about their deal, the ownership of Bob's old rig changed to the other fellow and the ownership of the other fellow's rig changed over to Bob. Remember, it is not the posession of the item than causes ownership, it is the agreement to exchange one value for another value that causes ownership. That why it is called trading.

-----Where is this written?
The moment they agreed to the terms there still had yet to complete the action involved in the deal. The way I see a trade working,it is the responsibility of each trader to transfer an intact item as agreed to in the trade. Until that moment that delivery is taken there is no tangable merchandise to even have effected a trade,it is all just virtual.


Ownership had changed and the ONLY obligation each had to the other was to pack the the other's equipment properly and ship it in a timely manner, per the agreed to shipping arrangements.

-----Again where is this written?
From my understanding the shipper is responsible until the item is delivered as described. That is why they refer to the insurance as "shipping insurance"
That is also why the shipping carrier will deal only with the shipper as it is between the shipper and the carrier to see that the shipment arrives intact.

This was done.

When Bob's new rig arrived, apparently, it had suffered some damage. It is now Bob's mission to secure suitable amount of damage claim funds to get his radio repaired. It is not the other fellow''s fault the radio was damaged, it was the carrier's fault.

Most unfortunately, the carrier, UPS, REQUIRES that all claim documentation come from the original shipper. This puts an additional burden on the fellow trading with Bob. He has to make all the claim arrangements for a radio that does not even belong to him.

-----Until the item is delivered as described it still belongs to the shipper and any hope of recovering a damage claim logicaly follows as the shippers responsibility.

The other fellow, satisfied with his new radio (Bob's old radio), has no obligation to send it back to Bob as a good faith gesture. He is doing what any good ham would do, he is doing the administrative work to get Bob's claim settled. There is no breach of contract, no broken agreement, no act of dishonesty.

-----Evidently the other fellow was not satisfied with his new radio(Bob's old radio) and even so seems to be holding it hostage against any damage claim being fulfilled by the carrier.
He also refuses to even have discussion about any of this at any time with Bob thus causing frustration and angst that may be easily avioded if he can effect some constructive communication.

He is doing what he should be doing. Nothing more and nothing less.

K4ICL
I am certainly not a lawyer and may well be dead wrong about any of these points but as I said above, you have stated your comments as though they are fact not opinion.
If so please elaborate.
I know that to me they fly in the face of what is common sense so I am curious how you arrived there.

You seem to imply that once the trade is agreed upon the failure to perform to the end of the transaction is not important at all. In this case it has left one party with all of the power and value in the trade and the other holding nothing.

Thanks
Ed
K6LVD
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:36 am
Location: Santa Rosa,Ca
Contact:

UPS shipments.

Post by K6LVD »

K4ICL is correct. the goods title transferred when the deal was made and the goods were delivered to the carrier.
UPS allows either party to file the claim, but they hide the fact in their tarfff forms.
The consignee may file a claim with small claims court in their town if they wish, but they might find that UPS will claim Carmack and want to go to Fed courts, but they usually won't do that for small amount.
You can ask the shipper to advise UPS that he is transferring all of his supposed rights to the consignee and have UPS deal with consignee or reciepient of the goods.
Have fun!

K6LVD Trader Jack of Carpinteria, Bakersfield, and Santa Rosa, California
The Santa Rosa Trader Jack used to run the Radios that Glow in the Dark Net on7240. Til this computer and old age got me.
K4ICL
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 1:07 pm
Location: Greenville, SC
Contact:

Me neither...

Post by K4ICL »

I am not a lawer either Ed but I do know what a contract is. It is not rocket science. Two people agreed to do a trade. Both state what will satisfy them in the deal. The deal is discussed and eventually finalized. It is a done deal.

A contract Ed.

What was the purpose of the agreement? To swap equipment. When the deal was agreed to, the swap became and exchange of ownership. That what swaps are all about. Whiy is this difficult to understand?
You seem to imply that once the trade is agreed upon the failure to perform to the end of the transaction is not important at all.
Excuse me. What failue to perform? The other person is attempting to get Bob reimbursement for his claim of damage. What else should he do? Send Bob the equipment he traded from Bob? Why should he reverse the deal that was mutually agreed to by both traders? It is not HIS fault the radio was damaged, was it? Or are you suggesting that the gent really sent him a rig that was not working? That he was cheating Bob? If so, you need to do the elaborating, Ed.
There are so many examples that argue against your sentiment that I have a hard time even outlining them...
Could you give a try, Ed. I really want to see some of those examples...

K4ICL
KC0UKR
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Missouri

Post by KC0UKR »

Look Al,now for some reason you seem to be taking my questions as an attack on you.
They are not. If my wording comes across that way please accept my apology.

I am asking,trying to learn here. If I am wrong about my gut feelings and how they relate to the way deals work,then I want to know and grow from it.
Not Rocket Science as you put it.

I did outline some of my arguments.

I sort of assumed that when Bob said that the radio came to him shortly after going through you that it was repaired or checked out and was in good working order when it left you.
I also have made no assertion that the radio was shipped with any sort of deception planned or in mind.
I DO NOT THINK IT WAS.

I simply mean exactly what I said,that the ownership did not transfer until the gear was delivered as described.
It was evidently not delivered as described and it follows if you feel as I have just said that there was a failure to deliver the radio as described.

If ownership transfers at the time of the deal being aggreed to then both parties could require the other to make their own arrangements for pickup and shipment and I don't think you would argue that that is what anyone would consider common or reasonable. Would you?

I have heard elsewhere that claims filing can be assigned to the recipient from the shipper but I have no first hand experience of that being true and you must either as you stated the shipper is required to file and argue for any claims.

I am responding to this whole thing because it is somewhat confusing I feel and not as clear cut as you have laid out.
I don't think I am alone there.

I do a fair amount of selling and trading and the more knowledge I gain the better I can perform.

Thanks
Ed
K4ICL
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 1:07 pm
Location: Greenville, SC
Contact:

No offense taken...

Post by K4ICL »

No offense taken, Ed. Honestly.
I simply mean exactly what I said, that the ownership did not transfer until the gear was delivered as described.
I agree, but it would be the case only if the agreement stipulated that the deal is not final until the traded goods are in each parties hands, in satisfactory condition. Each party details what is satisfactory to them when they discuss and accept the terms and conditions of the deal.

If something goes wrong, as it did with Bob, it is not the other gents obligation to make it right, unless such a contingency is agreed as part of the deal. Apparently, it was not. If he is an honorable seller/trader he will do what he can to help the other party recover legitimate damages. But this does not mean he is obligated to reverse the deal and return the goods he traded for and is satisfied with.

Looking at this from another prospective helps me grasp the reality of what is going on. Who is the injured party? In this case, Bob. Who injured Bob? If it was not the other gent, from what we have been told so far. So, why should the other gent be punished by having to give up the radio he wanted?

There is a way to circumvent this thorny situation. If you do more than a few trades a year, take the time to secure a UPS account and a USPS account. When you have something sent to you (bought or traded) send the other party a set of packing guidelines for him to use when packing you newly acquire gear. (Be sure to make his following your packing guidelines a condition of the deal.) Send him a self-addressed UPS or USPS shipping label, prepaid, so you are shipping your gear to yourself. By doing this you will have seen to proper packing and will have total control of the shipping of the goods you acquired. This suggested procedure won't keep the shipments from being damaged but will go a long ways to putting you in charge of getting things set right.
If ownership transfers at the time of the deal being agreed to then both parties could require the other to make their own arrangements for pickup and shipment and I don't think you would argue that that is what anyone would consider common or reasonable. Would you?
Yes, you are quite right. When someone says "local pick up only" that is exactly what they are doing. In this case, we are left to assume that each agreed that the other would do the shipping for the other. This is an all-too-common approach to getting goods back and forth between sellers/traders.
I am responding to this whole thing because it is somewhat confusing I feel and not as clear cut as you have laid out.
I don't think I am alone there.

It is confusing, Ed. Prior to the Internet, most selling and trading of used ham gear was at ham fests. No shipping problems, no sight unseen deals. Etc. Since neither of us were privy to the actual negations of this deal and we have only heard one party's side of the issue, for sure, I have made a lot of assumptions. But one this is not an assumption. A contract was formed, executed, and there are repercussions that, apparently, without the benefit of and agreed to contingency plan.

I also doubt doubt there was any discussion as to what action will be taken by either party if either or both are not completely satisfied with the outcome of the deal. There rarely is. eh?

Cheers,

K4ICL
Post Reply