bid on a delta...got a veil...

[Sorrell]

I have to agree that there was no reason for anyone to say anything negative about betta_sniper's name. Sure I hate getting sniped in an auction, but I really don't see how his name has anything to do with this situation at all.

 

[nibbles]

betta_sniper obviously had no intent on buying the fish.. just there to up the $$

 

[Sorrell]

Nibbles are you reading the aquabid forum? Maybe you should before you post things about people

 

[rollntider]

Nibbles are you reading the aquabid forum? Maybe you should before you post things about people

Yeah he or she is basically saying they are glad they didnt get the fish because they were thinking the fish was Deltatails also. Basically siding with Jac (but calling her jacblads ) But I do think we were a little harsh on Betta_snippr.

 

[tekknocolor]

If everyone that tried to bid on the same fish didn't know they were veiltails afterall, that should tell the seller that they were misleading on their fish.

Oh, and welcome back rollntider!

 

[rollntider]

and again the other bidder spoke up on the fish and claimed they didnt think they were bidding on VTs...... but at least they are siding with Jac.

 

[shrks1fan]

betta_sniper obviously had no intent on buying the fish.. just there to up the $$

You have no proof to back that claim and as others have said, if you read the aquabid forum you would know it's not true. Saying stuff like this isn't helping Jac, it's only making her look bad even though she's not the one saying it.

Linda

 

[rollntider]

thanks tek, it is nice to be back.



Yeah quit saying Snipper was just upping the bid , he/she has spoken up on behalf of Jac along with Utopia.

 

[tekknocolor]

betta_sniper obviously had no intent on buying the fish.. just there to up the $$

You have no proof to back that claim and as others have said, if you read the aquabid forum you would know it's not true. Saying stuff like this isn't helping Jac, it's only making her look bad even though she's not the one saying it.

Linda

I agree, you never know what someone else's intentions are concerning an auction. Let's not try to be negative about others and stick to what the topic was originally intended for.

 

[wuvmybetta]

Just out of nosiness....how much feedback does this seller have?

 

[purple_drazi]

wow. what a mess.


I've been selling on eBay and haunting the Community Help boards there for almost 6 years and here is general practise (what the majority of reputable dealers do) over there:
In cases where the buyer claims that the item has been misrepresented the seller generally offers a full refund and the buyer returns the item. The seller may or may not pay for return shipping - it's the seller's discretion whether to do so or not. In fact, the seller is not even obligated to refund the shipping fee the buyer originally paid—only the item price. Now, if the seller is really at fault, a good seller would be happy to absorb the shipping cost both ways, but a seller is under no obligation to do so.

In my experience the simplest route is always the best one.

Please don't take this as a criticism jac but no matter how wronged you may feel, the seller has made you a reasonable offer. You need to decide if you want to resolve this and move on or not. If not, well, that's your call. If you do, send her the fish back (registered mail!); don't assume that she's a cheat and won't refund your money. That simply clouds the issue and gets you nowhere. I wouldn't leave feedback for her either. If you do decide to though, make sure it's a plain statement of facts - no emotion! When I check a user's feedback the fb they have left sometimes tells me more about them than the people they are leaving the fb for! If she doesn't refund your money after she's rec'd the fishies, that's another issue you can deal with later.

I know that if you accept her offer you're taking a financial hit, but you made the decision to bid, no one forced you to. Buying online is tricky & sometimes you just have to make the best of a bad lot.

well, that's what I would do anyway.

<climbs into flame-proof suit>

 

[rollntider]

http/www.aquabid.com/cgi-bin/auction/vfb...?&&vfb&Felicity


108/113 overall not bad....

 

[rollntider]

wow. what a mess.


I've been selling on eBay and haunting the Community Help boards there for almost 6 years and here is general practise (what the majority of reputable dealers do) over there:
In cases where the buyer claims that the item has been misrepresented the seller generally offers a full refund and the buyer returns the item. The seller may or may not pay for return shipping - it's the seller's discretion whether to do so or not. In fact, the seller is not even obligated to refund the shipping fee the buyer originally paid—only the item price. Now, if the seller is really at fault, a good seller would be happy to absorb the shipping cost both ways, but a seller is under no obligation to do so.

In my experience the simplest route is always the best one.

Please don't take this as a criticism jac but no matter how wronged you may feel, the seller has made you a reasonable offer. You need to decide if you want to resolve this and move on or not. If not, well, that's your call. If you do, send her the fish back (registered mail!); don't assume that she's a cheat and won't refund your money. That simply clouds the issue and gets you nowhere. I wouldn't leave feedback for her either. If you do decide to though, make sure it's a plain statement of facts - no emotion! When I check a user's feedback the fb they have left sometimes tells me more about them than the people they are leaving the fb for! If she doesn't refund your money after she's rec'd the fishies, that's another issue you can deal with later.

I know that if you accept her offer you're taking a financial hit, but you made the decision to bid, no one forced you to. Buying online is tricky & sometimes you just have to make the best of a bad lot.

well, that's what I would do anyway.

<climbs into flame-proof suit>

it isnt jac's fault for bidding o n a Delta and getting a VT. I think Jac offered a fair offer of keeping VT's for 15 bucks. and both of the other bidders have now claimed they would not have bid as much either knowing it is a VT now. So I think the seller totally misrepresented the fact she was selling VTs. I think Jac offering to spend 15 dollars plus shipping on VTS is more than fair. The seller should have listed them as VTs and I bet the bid would have maxed out at 15.....the seller intended to scheme and it shows....the other bidders even stated they were glad they didnt win.....

it implies to me that you are condoning that the fish was misrepresented? I think 15 bucks for VTs is about 9 bucks too much since her and I could both get these type of fish for around 3 bucks locally. Before you are thinking I am taking up for my buddy, people can tell you Jac and I had our differences in the pastr, but being wronged is wrong. It is the sellers duty to represent the fish accurately. not mislead them.

 

[Auratus]

I still don't understand why the lady refuses to admit that it's not a Delta.
Does she not know the difference?

 

[cation]

Oops. Guess I was wrong about felicity being lotsoffish... ) Sorry for the confusion, jac.


I'd also like to say to betta_sniper that I like your attitude, straight shooter (no, not in that way... ). I hope you maybe stick around here at tff - we can always use another member that tells it like it is. And don't worry about these guys making fun of your name - sometimes the maturity level around here is questionable, at best. (But that's part of what makes it so fun! )