NGD - Not as described by seller (Fretboard member)

TeleMaster

ten77guitar said:

chenzman said:

Adey said:

Did all the photos show it unmarked and immaculate?

Either the photos are wrong or the description...

What’s your point? I’ve already said I didn’t see the mark that other people are saying is clear on the pickup.

That aside, neck pocket cracks, marks on side of fretboard and back of neck never shown or described.

I’m not sure how this is confusing people? ITS NOT AS DESCRIBED

You didn’t see the mark on the pickup yet you expect the seller to be 100% accurate? In other words, it’s okay if you miss something but not if the seller does?

It's irrelevant. People should be honest when selling. It's a contract and any deviation from the honesty, or any mistakes should result in compensation for the victim. Imagine it were you. 

In this case it's @chenzman ;;

I hope you get what you need back. 

Sassafras

You lot wanna buy a 2nd hand guitar from Andertons.

ten77guitar

chenzman said:

ten77guitar said:

chenzman said:

Adey said:

Did all the photos show it unmarked and immaculate?

Either the photos are wrong or the description...

What’s your point? I’ve already said I didn’t see the mark that other people are saying is clear on the pickup.

That aside, neck pocket cracks, marks on side of fretboard and back of neck never shown or described.

I’m not sure how this is confusing people? ITS NOT AS DESCRIBED

You didn’t see the mark on the pickup yet you expect the seller to be 100% accurate? In other words, it’s okay if you miss something but not if the seller does?

It wasn’t exactly pointed out though was it and I wasn’t the one selling the guitar or advertising it as unmarked

How can a seller point out every little thing that could be ‘wrong’ with a guitar? Maybe there’s a slight scuff on one of the tuners or there’s a blemish under the pick guard or one of the wires is slightly frayed? There’s a million slight issues that could be ‘wrong’, same as if you buy a used car. 

 Come on, you’re being ridiculous. The seller made a mistake in describing it “as new” but at the the same time you’re making a mountain out of a molehill. 

Sarge

I was going to add my opinion, but that's been covered on the first page by almost every other comment, and I'm fucked if I'm reading 6 more pages of this. 

chenzman

ten77guitar said:

chenzman said:

ten77guitar said:

chenzman said:

Adey said:

Did all the photos show it unmarked and immaculate?

Either the photos are wrong or the description...

What’s your point? I’ve already said I didn’t see the mark that other people are saying is clear on the pickup.

That aside, neck pocket cracks, marks on side of fretboard and back of neck never shown or described.

I’m not sure how this is confusing people? ITS NOT AS DESCRIBED

You didn’t see the mark on the pickup yet you expect the seller to be 100% accurate? In other words, it’s okay if you miss something but not if the seller does?

It wasn’t exactly pointed out though was it and I wasn’t the one selling the guitar or advertising it as unmarked

How can a seller point out every little thing that could be ‘wrong’ with a guitar? Maybe there’s a slight scuff on one of the tuners or there’s a blemish under the pick guard or one of the wires is slightly frayed? There’s a million slight issues that could be ‘wrong’, same as if you buy a used car. 

 Come on, you’re being ridiculous. The seller made a mistake in describing it “as new” but at the the same time you’re making a mountain out of a molehill. 

Unmarked, it stated it was Unmarked. I’m not interested in cars or molehills, goodbye

LPManic

Since this has turned into a bit of an existential crisis on the buying and selling of guitars on Internet forums, there are a few interesting things to reflect on here:

1. It seems that language is held most highly in the guitar purchasing process. So written description over any other details (including photos) offered.

2. It also seems that the buyer’s interpretation of the aforementioned written description of the item is held as the ultimate marker of the virtue of the transaction process. In other words, if the buyer has an issue with the written description after receiving the product - regardless of the usability or functionality of the guitar - then that has the potential to render the entire transaction void.

3. Ultimately this points to the fallibility of language in guitar selling, buying, and playing. The value of the guitar in this situation is being held up by the written description and correlation of this to the price paid. And yet we might argue that it just further underlines that the true value of any guitar is in the feel of the guitar - something which is unique to each player - and something transcends monetary value, language, or anything else connected to the object of the guitar. 

ten77guitar

TeleMaster said:

ten77guitar said:

chenzman said:

Adey said:

Did all the photos show it unmarked and immaculate?

Either the photos are wrong or the description...

What’s your point? I’ve already said I didn’t see the mark that other people are saying is clear on the pickup.

That aside, neck pocket cracks, marks on side of fretboard and back of neck never shown or described.

I’m not sure how this is confusing people? ITS NOT AS DESCRIBED

You didn’t see the mark on the pickup yet you expect the seller to be 100% accurate? In other words, it’s okay if you miss something but not if the seller does?

It's irrelevant. People should be honest when selling. It's a contract and any deviation from the honesty, or any mistakes should result in compensation for the victim. Imagine it were you. 

In this case it's @chenzman ;;

I hope you get what you need back. 

As I keep saying, it’s a matter of degree, not as black and white as you’re trying to claim. A seller shouldn’t be held hostage by the standards of someone who’s completely anal. It has to be reasonable. Describe a seller as dishonest in this situation is ridiculous.

Also, it has happened to me. I bought a guitar on this forum that arrived with a large ding that wasn’t described or pictured and the jack socket was cutting out. It was a great guitar and played superbly. I got my soldering iron out, fixed the socket, ignored the ding because it wasn’t visible when playing and got on with my life.

skaguitar

I've read this whole thread over the course of the day and I'm just wondering what the OP feels would be a satisfactory resolution..?
Would you happily keep the guitar with a goodwill gesture of say £50-100 because apart from the blemishes and cracks you like the guitar or were you feeling that a full refund and return of the guitar was what you wanted because you can't live with the faults..?

Either way it's a shame it can't be resolved between you.

Heel

Bought a guitar off here that got damaged in transit. Was resolved fortunately but  world not buy blind every again. 

TeleMaster

Ah I can't be bothered arguing. 

Seems very obvious to me and I hope it gets sorted. 

hyperben

It’s pretty naive to buy a guitar completely unseen (except photos) without any comeback at all from someone you don’t know. Just use proper PayPal and then you’re covered. If the seller really intended to screw over the buyer he didn’t need to send the guitar at all! There’s nothing the buyer could’ve done. So I suspect it was not his intention to purposefully mislead the buyer. In any case he has done so, probably unintentionally, so glad to see the buyer and seller are talking to each other to resolve this. Aside from that this really isn’t anyone else’s business.

ten77guitar

TeleMaster said:

@ten77guitar sorry mate, but you're on the wrong side of this particular argument.

If the guitar says as new, In fantastic condition and it's got blemishes all over it then you, me, or any other person has a right to feel aggrieved.

What you feel about it is completely up to you, and that's fine but you're trying to tell the guy to come down to your frankly, low standards and that's not how things works. He expected the item to be at the standard of the advert and it wasn't. 

I just cannot fathom how you aren't making the connection. Its perfectly reasonable. 

The advert included pictures that showed some of the marks. What’s your opinion on that?

WiresDreamDisasters

Lots of names in this thread that I wont buy or sell to in future.

Philly_Q

There's a strange perspective from those attacking the buyer and/or defending the seller in this thread. 
  
The buyer should, apparently, have been able to spot all the small flaws in this guitar from six or seven pictures (now removed, it seems) in the original listing.

On the other hand, it's apparently perfectly reasonable to suppose that the seller, who actually owned the guitar for two or three months before selling it, never noticed any of those small flaws and was therefore perfectly justified in describing the guitar as "fantastic unmarked condition, as new".

They're being held up to rather different standards regarding their respective observational skills.

brucegill

A seller shouldn’t be held hostage by the standards of someone who’s completely anal.

A buyer shouldn’t be “held hostage” by the standards of someone who’s either blind, has low standards, lies or just couldn’t give a shit. (Pick whichever one, or all of the above). 

It’s simple, don’t say it’s “as new” when it’s not. 

Personally I wouldn’t stress about the little marks on the neck, but the cracks in the paint on the neck pocket aren’t cool. That would have wound me up on a “as new” guitar. Price is irrelevant, the seller put the price on it. Not the buyer. Description is everything on these sales threads. 

TonyJacks

Shame on the mods - this should have been locked hours ago and left to the relevant parties to sort out in private.

It’s not constructive or good for anyone (funny though)

brucegill

WiresDreamDisasters said:

Lots of names in this thread that I wont buy or sell to in future.

I was just thinking that! 

Moominpapa

I think the mods need to put this thread out of its misery.

ten77guitar

Philly_Q said:

There's a strange perspective from those attacking the buyer and/or defending the seller in this thread. 
  
The buyer should, apparently, have been able to spot all the small flaws in this guitar from six or seven pictures (now removed, it seems) in the original listing.

On the other hand, it's apparently perfectly reasonable to suppose that the seller, who actually owned the guitar for two or three months before selling it, never noticed any of those small flaws and was therefore perfectly justified in describing the guitar as "fantastic unmarked condition, as new".

They're being held up to rather different standards regarding their respective observational skills.

If you agree the flaws are so small as to be hardly noticeable, does that not suggest something?

WiresDreamDisasters

Philly_Q said:

  
The buyer should, apparently, have been able to spot all the small flaws in this guitar from six or seven pictures (now removed, it seems) in the original listing. 

If true, then he's broken classifieds rules as well as been a douche.

@Digitalscream