An ethical question about what to do when a used rifle is misrepresented

[stickhunter]

Hi everyone,

I purchased a Marlin 1889 from an individual on another site. The rifle was described as being in "fair" condition and prior to purchase, I specifically asked the seller about the bore condition and the firing pin (1889's often have broken pins). The seller stated that the bore was in "good" condition and that the firing pin was fine.

I received the rifle yesterday, and upon my first inspection of the bore, I noticed a ring/bulge 6" from the muzzle. I then noticed a gouge in the chamber, probably the result of someone trying to pry out a broken case. Lastly, the firing pin was in fact broken into two pieces.

I can accept that the seller might have missed the broken firing pin and perhaps the gouged chamber, but the bulge/ring was obvious the first time I shone a light in the barrel.

While the seller is willing to refund the purchase cost, and I have offered to pay return shipping, the seller will not refund the original shipping cost. In his mind, because the problems were an honest oversight, he should not be penalized for them. On the other hand, my position is that he was responsible for the mistake, intentional or not, and that I should not be left as the sole payer for that mistake (i.e., be out the cost of shipping both ways).

The final straw for me was that he would only refund my money upon return of the rifle. I was starting to get a bad feeling about him, so I was not comfortable doing this, and since I paid for the rifle prior to the initial shipping, I felt that he should extend me the same courtesy and at least partially refund, if not fully, prior to the return shipping.

The seller will not budge, so I have accepted the advice of caveat emptor, and will deal with him no longer. However, I was so surprised by his attitude that I wanted to seek some advice about what you would expect to be done to resolve such a situation.

As a seller, I would accept my mistake and offer to fully refund shipping both ways --- that's the cost of business and my ignorance. Because of this belief, I'm extremely careful about examining and describing the rifles that I sell. Apparently others don't see it that way, so what's your opinion?

As an aside, the seller is not on this site, so I can't provide negative feedback; however, I am happy to provide his name/business (he's a gun trader in Ontario) to those who PM me.

 

[Skinny 1950]

I don't know much about rifles but a "bulge" in the barrel doesn't sound good. It is up to the seller to inspect the goods and report honestly about what is found. As you mentioned you paid up front so it is fair to expect a full refund before shipping it back. The vendor should cover all the shipping as they over-estimated the condition of the rifle or were careless in the description.
I really hope you can resolve this to your satisfaction.

 

[johnl]

Out the bastard. Post his name here. It will save fellow gunnutz a similiar fate.

 

[stickhunter]

Out the bastard. Post his name here. It will save fellow gunnutz a similiar fate.

Trust me, after my dealings with him, there is nothing more I would enjoy than to publically name him, but I believe this may be against board policies.

I also want to be clear that I don't believe he is a scammer. I do question his integrity, though, as he refuses to take responsibility for his mistake.

I think it's also important to mention that he did offer a refund of $100, but this is in no way sufficient to cover the cost of repairs. I stated to him that the only resolution that would moderately satisfy me would be a return of the rifle and refund of the purchase price and initial shipping (i.e., I would still pay return shipping). He refused, and would only refund the purchase price, and only after he had received the rifle.

It was clear to me that our negotiations were going nowhere, and his continued evasiveness and poor attitude left me less-than-willing to trust anything he said. As a result, the best option for me was to accept the $100, which I have done. What has set him off is that I never stated nor implied that the resolution would leave me satisfied... it was simply the best way for me to cut my loses.

 

[TERMINATOR101CA]

What you offered him was more than fair, he should be responsible for the shipping cost since it was his mistake not yours , and offering to pay for the return shipping was very generous on your side. You did good on not accepting the return first the refund, since this guy seems to be a flaker, anyone with integrity would have offered a full refund an an apology for wasting your time. My .02.

 

[CMichaud]

I don't see the dillema. How much did you pay for this rifle?

If it is a POS and the guy is offering you a refund less shipping, then eat $60 for shipping both ways and get out of the deal. Chalk the $60 up to lesson learned, caveat emptor etc.

Better than being stuck with a junker, unless it is worth more to you at the "all in" price you paid less $100 discount.

Regardless, you gotta beef with the guy then out him if he screwed you. Others will either agree or offer their opinion and we can decide whether to ever do biz with him.

BTW...if I hear a weapon described as "fair" I don't expect too much. Just my 3 cents!

 

[Light Infantry]

Trust me, after my dealings with him, there is nothing more I would enjoy than to publically name him, but I believe this may be against board policies.

Well,since you did the deal elsewhere, i dont think its against board policies.

 

[stickhunter]

If it is a POS and the guy is offering you a refund less shipping, then eat $60 for shipping both ways and get out of the deal. Chalk the $60 up to lesson learned, caveat emptor etc.

I absolutely agree with you. In terms of net dollars, I'm better off eating the 2-way shipping cost ($70) and getting my refund. However, the fly-in-the-ointment is that he won't refund me before he receives the rifle back and can verify the condition. Given his track record and attitude, I don't trust him to be good on his word. I instead risk being out my money and rifle... that's why the only prudent decision was to accept his partial refund and move on.

I'm not trying to get anything more from him, but his stance so alarmed me that I wanted to check my moral compass with a broader audience.

 

[CMichaud]

So how much are you out total then?

 

[stickhunter]

BTW...if I hear a weapon described as "fair" I don't expect too much. Just my 3 cents!

So how much are you out total then?

Sorry, I missed this in my first reply. My concern over the description of "fair" is why I explicitly asked about the bore condition and other broken parts. I was looking for a shooter, so didn't mind if fair referred to appearance --- I do mind that fair ended up meaning significant functional issues.

As far as price goes, we're not talking huge sums of money... certainly less than $1000, but enough that a $100 refund would not cover the diminished value--- it's a standard-grade antique Marlin, not a fancy grade Winchester. My interest in discussing this on an open forum is to verify how the majority of us would expect to be treated in a similar situation. As far as I'm concerned, this guy values his integrity at the cost of return shipping, or about $35.

 

[R005t3r]

If you buy a firearm without photographs and you do not know the seller, you pretty much have to settle for what you get.

I understand the issue with integrity but the onus is on the buyer to properly identify their purchase. I have sold well photo documented firearms to people that "jumped the gun" and wanted their money back after receiving the piece.

Had I not been more interested in my reputation and credability, I would have been right to tell them to keep it.

If this is a sore point for you, there are many gunshows where you can handle the merchandise and meet the seller.

 

[Mike Webb]

If you asked him specifically about the bore and the firing pin, he screwed up. If I were the seller I would immediately refund the purchase price plus initial shipping and let the unhappy buyer pay the return shipping. But most reputable sellers would check out these parts when a prospective buyer asked about them and save both buyer and seller a lot of crap.

 

[tactical870]

I've gotta admit that this sounds bad however I do the same thing when selling a gun. I'm happy to refund if anyone is unhappy for any reason as long as the buyer pays shipping both ways and I only refund when the gun is back in my hands. I think that is for the most part standard dealer policy. In this case though I think there was a lot of info held back by the seller although true "NRA antique fair" condition would be considered scrap or parts only by most of us on this board.

 

[DEZ]

Get your money back before you flame him stay calm .Get the money in hand even minus the shipping jump on it before he refuses then flame away.

 

[Max Power]

I feel for you man. That sucks. Hopefully he will relent on the 'rifle first' repayment. I'm with you on not trusting him otherwise.

S**t happens when buying on line. I got a F&W that was supposed to be .44 Webley. I slug the thing at .405 and yet the seller insisted that he had found it to be .430. I just wrote it off as bad luck rather than bad intention. He seemed like a genuinely honest dude otherwise. Probably never checked it before selling and I reaped the result. No other explanation...

Caveat Emptor is the rule. The good deals far exceed the bad in my experience though. The above example is the only time I've been hard done by.

 

[Andy]

I've gotta admit that this sounds bad however I do the same thing when selling a gun. I'm happy to refund if anyone is unhappy for any reason as long as the buyer pays shipping both ways and I only refund when the gun is back in my hands. I think that is for the most part standard dealer policy. In this case though I think there was a lot of info held back by the seller although true "NRA antique fair" condition would be considered scrap or parts only by most of us on this board.

I see where the seller's coming from too. You have a gun you're unhappy with and want a full refund including shipping. If he sends a refund before he gets the gun back, what's stopping you from holding the gun hostage until more is sent? If it's an antique then there's no registration transfer that can occur back to him before he ships it that evens the field.

A Mexican standoff. Unless he budges on the extra shipping, I'd send it back, take the money and move on.

 

[Lima]

I see where the seller's coming from too. You have a gun you're unhappy with and want a full refund including shipping. If he sends a refund before he gets the gun back, what's stopping you from holding the gun hostage until more is sent?

+1
I don't know of many circumstances where a seller would refund money without the returned goods in hand even if they may be at fault for misrepresenting. Every try to ask Amazon.com for the refund money before you sent something not as described (or you did not like) back?

 

[tiriaq]

I see where the seller's coming from too. You have a gun you're unhappy with and want a full refund including shipping. If he sends a refund before he gets the gun back, what's stopping you from holding the gun hostage until more is sent? If it's an antique then there's no registration transfer that can occur back to him before he ships it that evens the field.

A Mexican standoff. Unless he budges on the extra shipping, I'd send it back, take the money and move on.

Eat the cost of shipping, get your refund, and move on.
An 1889 Marlin isn't an antique, so there is the added bother of an other transfer.

 

[sunray]

"...the 'rifle first' repayment..." Nobody will do that with a 'mail order' sale. Be the same as shipping anything before it's paid for.
A lot depends on how the rifle was advertised. If it was sold 'as is', you're SOL. Despite what he said. Especially when it's described as being in 'fair' condition. 'Fair' means different things to different people.
If you don't want it, send it back. You're on the hook for the shipping in any direction. Shipping costs aren't really part of the purchase price.

 

[stickhunter]

I appreciate everyone's comments and it's true that the situation is not clear cut --- that's exactly why I wanted to hear what others thought. I think the Mexican Standoff reference is particularly good in this case as we've both lost, for one reason or another, the trust of the other and this has made the situation almost intractable.

While I do appreciate the analogy to Amazon.com and other retailers not refunding any of the shipping costs, I will respectfully disagree that my situation is the same.

In the case of this rifle, I asked for detailed pictures showing the exterior condition of the rifle. Knowing that it is nearly impossible to accurately represent bore condition with a photograph, I spoke on the phone with the seller to determine his background/knowledge about firearms and then to specifically enquire about the bore condition, to which he replied that it was good (along with a further description of rifling, colour, etc).

Perhaps a better analogy would be if you were to purchase a used item, and before purchase, you asked if any parts were missing. The seller responds, "No, everything's there". You receive the item and there are obvious parts missing making the item non-functional. When you point this out to the seller, they respond, "Oh, I didn't really look it over that well. Send it back, I'll refund you but you pay shipping both ways." I'd be pretty ticked off.

In my belief system, and this is why I'm asking this question because I know beliefs differ, as the seller I would feel a personal responsibility for misleading the buyer, intentionally or not, and would feel obligated to refund shipping both ways. In the case of the Marlin 1889, I'm not asking for a full refund, but for the seller to take some responsibility for his oversight and refund the initial shipping cost.

Again, the reason I brought this into an open forum is that I feel very strongly about my responsibility and liability as a seller (I buy/sell here and elsewhere quite a bit), and it has become clear that we all have differing views. I'm trying to get a sense of how off-base, or on-base, I might be so that I can avoid future issues.

While "caveat emptor" might be the only thing we'll all agree on, I think it is used far too liberally as an excuse for bad business practices and seller's dodging their responsibilities.

To fill out the context, it may help to include my initial email and his response:

My email:

The Marlin 1889 that I bought from you in February finally arrived today. The package appeared to be no worse-for-wear after all the travelling, but was marked "Return to sender for address" with an arrow pointing to a handwritten "To:" in the center with no address. However, there was a second "To:" with my name that appeared to be in the same handwriting on the right side of the package. I can't imagine the post office accepting a parcel without an address, so my guess is that the empty "To:" is what caused the problems.

Anyways, the good news is that the rifle arrived. The bad news is that the rifle has a number of issues, which are concerning to me:

1) The bore is ringed/bulged about 6 inches from the muzzle. I noticed a dark ring in the bore when I observed it with a light and was then able to detect the corresponding bulge on the outside of the barrel. I can also feel the bulge when pushing a patch through the bore.
2) When I examined the chamber, I noticed a gouge on the left side, which was probably caused by someone trying to remove a stuck case.
3) The firing pin is broken. 1889's have a solid firing pin, yet I can move the front and rear halves independently.

Before I purchased the rifle, I asked about the bore condition and the state of the firing pin --- none of these issues was disclosed. In no way do I think you intentionally hid these issues, but rather missed them due to an incomplete examination. However, the result is that I don't believe the rifle was accurately described, particularly with regards to my specific pre-sale questions.

I would like to return the rifle for a refund of the original purchase price (###)and shipping ($35) --- I will cover the cost of return shipping.

Please let me know if this would be acceptable to you or if you'd like to discuss a resolution to the problems by phone.

Thanks very much,
###

His reply:

So sorry, i got the gun in a lot and I guess i am guilty of not giving it a complete examination.
If you return it I will refund you $###, the purchase price, if you wish to keep it I will take your word on condition & refund you $100.