K7VS IS NOT A FAIRPERSON TO DEAL WITH
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.
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.
I'm not so quick to side against K7VS
Seems that Van isn't necessarily being unreasonable in wondering if he had a committed buyer or just a tire-kicker. Also, I am not sure why some of the most vitriolic posters here assumed, absent any facts, that K7VS received more money locally than the distant ham would have sent. There's been no indication that he sold it locally for the 'shipped' price, so why assume the worst. Perhaps he discounted it to reflect that he didn't have to ship. It seems in all of this, K7VS never received what to me would be the deal-making e-mail "I'm sending the money order." Had he received THAT e-mail and THEN sold it out from under the first buyer, I'd agree the complaint bears merit. But he did send the first buyer notice that the item was sold BEFORE the first buyer committed to sending the MO.