Forum members beware of fraud

[Over it]

Originally Posted by pokeybritches

What would stop you both from using an escrow to transfer the title and pay the remaining balance? Is it only the agreement about the front bumper paint?

Yes. In fact the seller volunteered and then reniged on paying half. Despite the BS I am still amenable to that. However I'm not sure how to validate any particular escrow company. Cudos to you if you can broker this mess.

[bmwclubracer]

Originally Posted by in2twins

Seller did not mention paint was peeling off the bumper.

It's not scraped off, it's falling off.

The agreement calls for the seller to send the title to receive the balance. He has not done so and it is beyond me why anyone here thinks that is acceptable?

But you had a both a PPI, friend look at it, AND you signed for it at the port? And it sounds like the paint might be peeling as a result of taping up the bumper which YOU asked seller to do. Not to mention you've driven the crap out of the car and are modding it so obviously you're keeping it. The right thing to do was to park it after you realized an issue and then work out some kind of return to the seller.

Seller would be a moron to send you the title at this point. You should MAN UP and send him the cash overnight.

[bmwclubracer]

Originally Posted by in2twins

If folks keep indicting me I will respond. The seller retracted his offer to split the repair and given his behavior sending him the difference will not get me my title.

I never would've made that offer but good on him for retracting the offer. I don't know that his 'behavior' is wrong here, only thing he's done wrong is sending a car off without being paid for it. If he got the 7K I'm pretty sure the seller would overnight the title just to be done with it.

One note to seller...get a bank draft for balance AND wait a week before sending title off to eliminate chance of fraud.

[bmwclubracer]

Originally Posted by in2twins

Seller never said he didn't know about the paint so I'm not sure why he deserves that defense. Concealed defect is exactly what it sounds like.

Seller said he doesn't know about the paint...how could he know the tape YOU requested would pull the paint off. There's no concealed defect as your friend inspected the car, pro's inspected the car (you need to pay for that by the way), and YOU inspected the car at the port.

Pay your bills deadbeat!

[Huz-Z]

Today's word is: sleeveen

(https://stancarey.wordpress.com/2014...ge-in-ireland/)

[chickdr]

This is what confuses me about the whole issue. The buyer keeps saying the bumper paint was a concealed defect. Not sure where this is coming from as the bumper was not covered when the PPI, or friends inspection was done. Also, there was no mention of a paint issue on the buyers thread with the video of the three cars in his driveway. If the tape damaged the bumper, it is completely on the buyer as he requested it to be done prior to shipping. How can the seller be called dishonest? It makes no difference if he has one or one thousand posts. The car obviously met muster to the buyer on the 200 mile drive which seemed to have been after the tape was taken off.

The buyer also keeps saying he can't send the money as he is concerned the title won't be sent. What evidence does he have of this? Seems like an excuse to get a 7k discount on the car. What good does the title do for the seller? The car is thousands of miles away on an island....

[chickdr]

Originally Posted by Huz-Z

Today's word is: sleeveen

(https://stancarey.wordpress.com/2014...ge-in-ireland/)

To whom are you referring? The buyer or the seller?

[WeekendWarriorz]

The buyer here in my eyes is disgusting. First off, he reveals the seller's full name in the post giving away personal information, then tries to justify his stupidity and dishonesty for not giving the seller the money they agreed on due to a slight defect which is entirely to blame on his end. Your friend didn't see the paint, the damn dealership didn't see the paint, oh and now you're trying to mod the car? Yeah no... If there was in fact a huge problem the car would be left untouched until the disputes where settled. Also, why wasn't the damage mentioned when you got the car at the port? Too many variables here and they ALL don't work in your favor.. Those of you who have been scammed by guys like in2twins can probably feel the anger and stupidity of this guy when reading this thread.

[Over it]

Photos are time stamped and we're taken at the ocean carrier facility before I accepted it. The contract written by the seller calls for him to mail the title. He never sent the title violating our contract that HE WROTE.

The contract amount remaining is 5680.00 less half the cost of a repair and not plus miscellaneous stuff cause he is angry.
It doesn't matter what you think as it's not your money. anyway have a nice day

[dc_wright]

I'm going to throw in some "middle ground" info here. Having previously owned and operated a body shop, I can state that achieving OEM level adherence to a PVC bumper cover can be challenging. The prep has to be correct and meticulous to get that. It's entirely possible to get a good looking respray that under normal conditions will hold up well, but is only at partial adherence level compared to OEM. There's no visual means to determine the actual adherence level, it requires an actual paint peel test, which I can also state I've never seen any body shop do because it's destructive.
Part two of this is that some masking tapes have a limited removal time where peel off forces haven't increased due to adhesive "set". In this particular case due to transport time, the tape was on for an extended time, depending on how the car was transported there may have been several solar heating cycles involved, and the tape adhesive took a set and partially bonded to the paint.
Under this scenario, the PPI would have been good, the seller would have had no way of knowing there was a paint adherence issue short of running a destructive bonding strength test, the tape covering requested by the buyer was on longer than intended by it's manufacturer due to transit time to HI, and unfortunately when it was removed it had bonded to the paint and peeled some of it off. It's one of those "oh crap I never knew that" things that can happen with no evil intent on anyone's part, particularly not a planned "fraud". If buyer and seller could agree this is the scenario (I think it's exactly what happened) maybe you can back things down a notch and negotiate an appropriate compromise?

EDIT: I guess Buyer and Seller could start a pissing contest about the type of tape used, but I think neither knew about the removal time issue, so again no fraudulent intent, just an "oh $hit" accidental event neither foresaw.

[chickdr]

Originally Posted by Over it

Photos are time stamped and we're taken at the ocean carrier facility before I accepted it. The contract written by the seller calls for him to mail the title. He never sent the title violating our contract that HE WROTE.

The contract amount remaining is 5680.00 less half the cost of a repair and not plus miscellaneous stuff cause he is angry.
It doesn't matter what you think as it's not your money. anyway have a nice day

I still don't see where you are going here. You have to add the PPI cost to the $5,680 you already owe as well. Seller has no obligation to pay for half of anything as it wasn't in the original sales agreement. If he sent the title how would he know you would pay anything? I suspect you would deduct some crazy amount for bumper repainting and hope he accepted it. It certainly seems like a 3rd party escrow to handle the transfer is the way to go at this juncture.

[Finnegan]

Originally Posted by dc_wright

I'm going to throw in some "middle ground" info here. Having previously owned and operated a body shop, I can state that achieving OEM level adherence to a PVC bumper cover can be challenging. The prep has to be correct and meticulous to get that. It's entirely possible to get a good looking respray that under normal conditions will hold up well, but is only at partial adherence level compared to OEM. There's no visual means to determine the actual adherence level, it requires an actual paint peel test, which I can also state I've never seen any body shop do because it's destructive.
Part two of this is that some masking tapes have a limited removal time where peel off forces haven't increased due to adhesive "set". In this particular case due to transport time, the tape was on for an extended time, depending on how the car was transported there may have been several solar heating cycles involved, and the tape adhesive took a set and partially bonded to the paint.
Under this scenario, the PPI would have been good, the seller would have had no way of knowing there was a paint adherence issue short of running a destructive bonding strength test, the tape covering requested by the buyer was on longer than intended by it's manufacturer due to transit time to HI, and unfortunately when it was removed it had bonded to the paint and peeled some of it off. It's one of those "oh crap I never knew that" things that can happen with no evil intent on anyone's part, particularly not a planned "fraud". If buyer and seller could agree this is the scenario (I think it's exactly what happened) maybe you can back things down a notch and negotiate an appropriate compromise?

EDIT: I guess Buyer and Seller could start a pissing contest about the type of tape used, but I think neither knew about the removal time issue, so again no fraudulent intent, just an "oh $hit" accidental event neither foresaw.

Eminently rational and reasonable, and experience and fact based.

[3002 tii]

Originally Posted by dc_wright

I'm going to throw in some "middle ground" info here. Having previously owned and operated a body shop, I can state that achieving OEM level adherence to a PVC bumper cover can be challenging. The prep has to be correct and meticulous to get that. It's entirely possible to get a good looking respray that under normal conditions will hold up well, but is only at partial adherence level compared to OEM. There's no visual means to determine the actual adherence level, it requires an actual paint peel test, which I can also state I've never seen any body shop do because it's destructive.
Part two of this is that some masking tapes have a limited removal time where peel off forces haven't increased due to adhesive "set". In this particular case due to transport time, the tape was on for an extended time, depending on how the car was transported there may have been several solar heating cycles involved, and the tape adhesive took a set and partially bonded to the paint.
Under this scenario, the PPI would have been good, the seller would have had no way of knowing there was a paint adherence issue short of running a destructive bonding strength test, the tape covering requested by the buyer was on longer than intended by it's manufacturer due to transit time to HI, and unfortunately when it was removed it had bonded to the paint and peeled some of it off. It's one of those "oh crap I never knew that" things that can happen with no evil intent on anyone's part, particularly not a planned "fraud". If buyer and seller could agree this is the scenario (I think it's exactly what happened) maybe you can back things down a notch and negotiate an appropriate compromise?

EDIT: I guess Buyer and Seller could start a pissing contest about the type of tape used, but I think neither knew about the removal time issue, so again no fraudulent intent, just an "oh $hit" accidental event neither foresaw.

I was going to say I've seen this happen at the track actually. Drivers get overzealous with taping up the front but don't use the right painters tape. Instead they use some strong masking tape and end up pulling off their paint. Not sure if it was lack of proper prep or if the paint never had a chance to fully cure but good resprays will rarely march factory finish and quality.

Back on topic: Pay the man what's owed to him, after you factor the PPI and splitting the paint work down the middle. You reference your Supra forum days or the one time you bought $100 spring shere but none of that means jack here. Facts are facts and seller did his part without any misrepresentation. DC said it himself, in his own professional experience paint transfer is not unusual.

[Over it]

Originally Posted by 3002 tii

I was going to say I've seen this happen at the track actually. Drivers get overzealous with taping up the front but don't use the right painters tape. Instead they use some strong masking tape and end up pulling off their paint. Not sure if it was lack of proper prep or if the paint never had a chance to fully cure but good resprays will rarely march factory finish and quality.

Back on topic: Pay the man what's owed to him, after you factor the PPI and splitting the paint work down the middle. You reference your Supra forum days or the one time you bought $100 spring shere but none of that means jack here. Facts are facts and seller did his part without any misrepresentation. DC said it himself, in his own professional experience paint transfer is not unusual.

I would if that would get me the title but Seller has declined stating he'd rather sue.

[dc_wright]

Originally Posted by 3002 tii

I was going to say I've seen this happen at the track actually. Drivers get overzealous with taping up the front but don't use the right painters tape. Instead they use some strong masking tape and end up pulling off their paint.

Last track day at Sebring one of the novices showed up with an E90 M3 with a chameleon paint job and the front end covered with CLEAR PACKING TAPE. Needless to say it was NOT a pretty site when the tape was pulled off at the end of the weekend. Lots of paint transfer to the packing tape.

[Swashplate]

Originally Posted by chickdr

To whom are you referring? The buyer or the seller?

I would say Both. This transaction is a joke.

[Swashplate]

Originally Posted by Finnegan

Eminently rational and reasonable, and experience and fact based.

That is not what we want here. Beat it logic!!! Waaaargaarblll

[Huz-Z]

Originally Posted by Swashplate

I would say Both. This transaction is a joke.

No.

The seller has done nothing wrong.

[AriuSen]

Originally Posted by Over it

I would if that would get me the title but Seller has declined stating he'd rather sue.

I wonder if you would send the title to me if I still owed you 7k. Hopefully I can buy a car from you in the future

It's unbelievable how buyer is gonna get so screwed now in this lawsuit over a 350 dollar paint job haha. You got you deserved buddy.

[rockstar93]

Originally Posted by Huz-Z

No.

The seller has done nothing wrong.

I think the seller made 2 errors, both because he's a decent human being with some (undeserved) trust in others.

1) Sent a car without full payment
2) Considered the thought of contributing towards the repaint

Based on the information we have (and I think we've seen enough), this is 100% on the buyer. The car obviously passed all 3 inspections - PPI, his friend on the mainland, and his own when he received, modded, and drove the car. The seller went above and beyond to close the deal, and the buyer is trying to take advantage of that.

This doesn't even include the other indecent acts of posting the personal information of the seller on the boards, not paying for the PPI/courier, etc.

I feel for the seller, but based on what I'm seeing of the buyer, he's not getting a dime out of him unless he sues as he legitimately and falsely believes he's in the right.

Good luck OP with everything, and thanks for the heads up on another individual to not do business with.

[dc_wright]

Originally Posted by rockstar93

I think the seller made 2 errors, both because he's a decent human being with some (undeserved) trust in others.

1) Sent a car without full payment
2) Considered the thought of contributing towards the repaint

Based on the information we have (and I think we've seen enough), this is 100% on the buyer. The car obviously passed all 3 inspections - PPI, his friend on the mainland, and his own when he received, modded, and drove the car. The seller went above and beyond to close the deal, and the buyer is trying to take advantage of that.

This doesn't even include the other indecent acts of posting the personal information of the seller on the boards, not paying for the PPI/courier, etc.

I feel for the seller, but based on what I'm seeing of the buyer, he's not getting a dime out of him unless he sues as he legitimately and falsely believes he's in the right.

Good luck OP with everything, and thanks for the heads up on another individual to not do business with.

Nope! One of the basic tenets of contracts law is that both parties have an absolute responsibility to mitigate damages. While the seller could technically claim to be in the right, it was absolutely the right thing to do to offer a path to settlement of the dispute. It's unfortunate that he withdrew the offer as that will work against him if this goes before a small claims court judge.

Note to Seller: It's one thing to get a lawyer and sue. It's another to collect after you win, particularly from a party in another state (you'll need to hire a process server in HI to serve him notice of the suit). Assuming you win in this civil matter, you'll get an order from the small claims court judge for the buyer to pay you $7K (there's no pain and suffering, punitive damages, or anything other than the value of your base claim in small claims court typically). This will leave you exactly where you are now with the buyer owing you $7K that you must collect. You'll need to spend some additional money to hire an attorney in HI to find some asset the buyer owns and put a lien on it for the value of your claim. His Supra is likely the only registered asset for this (unless he own's a home), and the lien will only get paid if he sells it because he won't be able to transfer the title to his buyer. If the Buyer executes what's recommended below, then you need to send the title to him. You can spend a bunch of time and money in the courts being "right" and wind up netting less than what half the cost of the respray will cost. Much better to find a way to settle this between the two of you.



Note to Buyer: The only "defect" cited on the car is where some paint peeled off when you removed the masking tape. You need to go get three quotes for a respray of the front bumper cover and send them to the seller. Make certain they're reasonable quotes. Deduct half the average value of the three quotes from the $7K and send that to the Seller. You also need to consider retracting the "fraud" accusation. From what I can see here with the exception of the paint peel on the front bumper the car seems to be everything you expected to get. The paint transfer to the tape appears to be an innocent mistake and not any intent to sell you something less than was advertised. Same to you as to finding a way to settle. You have $23K parked in your driveway until you can get the title to it to make it into a usable car.

Note to Seller and Buyer: Neither of you will be happy with the litigation process. You'll both spend more money than should be in dispute here and have a high chance of winding up exactly where you are now.

Just my $.02 on this.

[rockstar93]

Originally Posted by dc_wright

Nope! One of the basic tenets of contracts law is that both parties have an absolute responsibility to mitigate damages. While the seller could technically claim to be in the right, it was absolutely the right thing to do to offer a path to settlement of the dispute. It's unfortunate that he withdrew the offer as that will work against him if this goes before a small claims court judge.

Ethically, perhaps - but was the seller legally responsible (not challenging you, but asking as I'm no expert and am now curious).

It would seem to me that they aren't, as this occurred after the sales contract was finalized and agreed to and a result of the buyer. If the buyer requested a portable heater be plugged into the car during transit so it arrived nice and toasty for him, but it burned the seat as a result - would both parties be on the hook for half?