The picture on the grass is the original pucture posted by Seabassman84, he is seller #1. He sold it to, session1969. Session got it, played it briefly, pickup cover had been added but not a big deal. Session then put it away. $100 was and still is owed to session in that deal. Anyway, a few weeks later Session put it up for sale, used the same photos as he didnt have a camera. I (#3 in all this now) bought the bass from Session and found all the issues. Session refunded my money and here we are.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Buyer/Trader Beware on TB !
- Thread starter Session1969
- Start date
The other pictures showing all the holes are from me (jaredbt) to Session. He just posted them to help with the facts.
Owner 1 (aproud1) posted the pictures on the grass in his for sale thread.
Owner 2 (seabassman84) replied to a thread started by Session 1969. Pics were exhanged (I assume) via email or PM. I don't know what pics those were.
Owner 3 (Session1969) then used the pictures of the bass on the grass in his for sale thread.
Owner 4 (JaredBT) discovered the problems after taking the bass to a luthier (apparently)
Owner 3 claimed to have taken the bass to the luthier, but no issues with any drilled holes were found.
Who took the picture of the pickguard with the extra drill holes, and when was it taken?
Things just don't add up here.
And as far as the $100, Session1969 outright said he let it slide. He has no more claim to it after that.
@JaredBT
Hypothetical question:
Session issued you a refund, correct? What if before agreeing to that he said he'll take the bass back, trade it back with seabass, and then issue the refund.
Would you have been happy with that arrangement?
Hypothetical question:
Session issued you a refund, correct? What if before agreeing to that he said he'll take the bass back, trade it back with seabass, and then issue the refund.
Would you have been happy with that arrangement?
And as I understand it, this is owner #3's responsibility and only his responsibility, no?
He could have, but he didnt because he knew it was misrepresented to him after I brought it to his attention.
And in the five weeks he owned it, he didn't discover the misrepresentations? Whether he owned it for an hour or a month, disclosure was his responsibility. He owned. He sold it. He misrepresented it.
In my eyes, yes. Owner 2 can not be held responsible for Owner 4 finding things wrong with the bass. Owner 3 said he took it to a luthier for inspection. Either a) it was a really bad luthier that didn't check the bass over thoroughly, or b) there was no drill hole damage found by the luthier.
After the bass was inspected by a professional, Owner 2 would be off the hook for anything further happening to the bass.
I've sold basses here that I've bought from here. If the buyer discoveres a problem that I didn't disclose, it's my problem. Not the person I bought it from (from whom I bought it?)
You're the 4th person. You were the one that found the issues after Owner 3's luthier apparently did not.
