I'm posting this here 'cos it's the place most likely to get noticed...
A few folk have messaged me of late, complaining about sellers not holding items for them while they sort out payment "tomorrow".
Here's a golden rule:
unless you've already paid, the seller has no obligation to sell you the item.
Remember, the classifieds here are based on good faith only, and because there are a fair number of rare items and fabulously-low prices, there are a
lot of tyre-kickers around who'll immediately get buyers' remorse after they've committed to buying something...that tends to lead the sellers into a spiral of awkward communications.
So - unless you're totally stuck, you should always try to pay as soon as you've got the payment details and you've decided you want the item, or accept the risk that it may go to somebody else while you're faffing and the seller's wondering whether they've actually made a sale or not. Accusing people of dickery because they let somebody else pay while you were chilling out isn't going to help anybody.
Also, here's our standard caveat: we don't police such things in the classifieds, unless there's a scam going on. We just rely on everybody to be cool to each other. Cool? Good
<space for hire>
Comments
In summary, I ask to buy an item from him and he agrees to sell me the item (late evening messages exchanged) and I state that I will send him the ppg in the morning. The following morning I am told that the item is sold to someone else. His justification was that he had a policy of "first to pay secures the sale". Fair enough if he stipulated this in his sales thread... BUT as a buyer this policy was undocumented and therefore unknown to me.
Now, as I pointed out, this is not Gumtree and we are a community on here and I would like to think we can treat each other as we would like to be treated ourselves - not always the case I know. Many here have been messed around with when using the classifieds - myself included. But I always give the members the benefit of the doubt.
There is no real way we can measure/police gentlemanly conduct on here, so my proposal would be to specify the terms of your payment/sale clearly in your classifieds thread. Therefore if a fellow member stipulates that the first payment received wins(!) or payment must be received within 24 hrs of comms etc.. then there can be no argument.
EDIT:- Can we please ask members to leave the sale price (as per the rules) of items on their threads too - this rule is not being adhered to in many cases..
In fact, that has always been the case here. Nobody has to stipulate that the first payment wins at all, because it's the default position. That's precisely what I'm trying to say
Again: if you want to buy something, don't delay the payment. In 99% of cases, that's the buyer allowing themselves a chance to change their minds. If you absolutely must delay, explain why and give a time by which you'll have paid so the seller doesn't lose out on selling it to someone else if you can't do it.
If you see anything like that, then flag it. We enforce it as much as we can, but we can't vet every classifieds thread and thus we rely on folk telling us when that rule is being broken (ie if we don't see it, we can't do anything about it).
RE:- missing prices - will do
• Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/@Goldeneraguitars
If I have a dialogue with someone and agree to sell something to them on here (not Shpock or gumtree etc) and they say they will pay me in the morning I would at least wait for that payment the following morning. If agreed payment doesn't arrive the following morning then I would move it on. Something easily done if I have a queue of forum members for that sale. If the item was highly specialised and was difficult to sell or I was absolutely desperate for the money then maybe I would have a different approach.
To put it in context I was not asking for my cheque to clear but merely time to log on to my computer the following morning (convo took place way past my bedtime) to make sure my pp funds were available and if not transfer the necessary money over. If this meant I would lose the sale then maybe that should have been made clearer.
We are not talking hard hitting business here we are talking community transactions among forum members with whom we communicate on a daily basis. Maybe I am just too naive and my ethics dont match those of the wider community...
Was a time agreed by both parties? Or did you just tell him that's what would happen with a vague deadline, the implication being for him to put everything else on hold until you got in touch?
Because no deal is done until money has changed hands. This is a principle that exists throughout the world in the course of normal life.
There really is no more to say on the matter, regardless of how vociferously you argue that it's unfair because you don't like the result; I know exactly what the "community spirit" here is because I (along with the moderators and the original admins) worked bloody hard to foster and maintain it! It has always been the case that no deal is complete until money has changed hands, and that is so as to apply fairness to both the buyer and the seller (because either can pull out up to that point).
Yes, it sucks that you didn't get the item you wanted, but you (and everybody else) should consider it a cautionary tale - if you say you want something, pay for it straight away. That has two results - your claim is solidified, and the seller is happier.
Oh, and for the record - PayPal Gift can still be regarded as a business transaction (as this probably was). The words "PayPal Gift" have no legal standing, it just represents that PayPal don't provide any methods of financial restitution for the payer.
Have a good day
Cheers !
And once it’s handed over, cash provides even less protection than PPG. Just saying.
Cautionary tale from the seller's perspective.
On another UK forum that shall remain nameless, my avatar is a photograph of an old and difficult to find Yamaha bass guitar. A member of that forum sent me a PM to enquire whether my Yamaha bass guitar might be for sale. I replied that it might. There followed:- an offer of a cash deposit to secure the bass guitar.
- a sob story about moving house and funds being tied up.
- a part-exchange offer involving another bass guitar (that I did not want).
- another sob story, asking me to wait until the would-be p-ex bass guitar sold on t'Interweb.
- a message that the would-be p-ex bass guitar had been relisted.
- a deafening silence.
I consider my tyres well and truly kicked. Had I been under financial pressure to shift my Yamaha bass guitar, by now, I would have gladly advertised it elsewhere, accepted the first offer of payment in full and looked forward to berating the time waster.In a recent experience on this forum, a remark in an Item Wanted discussion prompted a member to PM me, promising to send photographs of an item of interest "in the morning". Neither photographs nor a price ever arrived.
Next thing I know, the potential seller is closing a deal with somebody else in the public forum.
Yes, I can understand why the potential seller followed the money. On the other hand, it is galling to be denied even the chance of striking a deal. That is plain bad manners.
This forum could do with longer Ignore Lists. The alternative is to close one's account.
Seems like a bit of an overreaction to me. Each to their own, though.
What Lovestrat was talking about was a discussion between two regular posters where one said he would send payment in the morning and the other didn't wait for whatever reason.
I agree with Lee that technically the seller was within their rights to do so, if I was Lovestrat I would also have been surprised/disappointed with it.
I consider a fair few people on here as friends, even though I’ve actually only ever met 3 or 4 members in the flesh. Realistically though, we’re still strangers who just happen to share a hobby and we only really know people’s online personas.
For me, there’s no such thing as first dibs or holding something for strangers... the person that comes up with a firm offer and then puts money in the bank trumps everyone else. Likewise if I want something myself I’ll make the offer and then pay up once it’s accepted. On another forum I use this is implicit in the classifieds rules... there’s no calling dibs, just pay up to seal the deal, the seller can sell to whoever they chose. I’m not actually suggesting we adopt the same rules here, just pointing out it’s not that uncommon.
I get the point about ‘first come, first served’, and it’s clear that many of the above have suffered from being mucked about by tyre kickers. It’s also really easy to pay quickly, and once you have someone’s details it’s the matter of a moment to send money.
However, not all of us are constantly checking our e-mails. If an ad has been responded to with “Hi, I’d like to buy your thing, can you send me your payment details?”, surely it’s reasonable to send them and (while waiting for payment) respond to further buyers with “Someone’s already been in touch - if it falls through I’ll let you know”. Or at least message the first buyer and let them know “There are others interested - in case I don’t receive payment today, I’ll release it to them”.