Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+ Trade: dj_4dig and #1MichiganFan

[dj_4dig]

The TCC Collector Zone Transaction Manager generated the following agreement:

dj_4dig receives:

52' topps style buck williams auto bv=25

#1MichiganFan receives:

posey/juwon howard sp game used dual jersey /100 bv=25

Additional notes:

both sending at the same time with d.c. in bubble mailer. thanks

[#1MichiganFan]

I agree to this trade

[dj_4dig]

#1michigan received his end but it came damaged and not sure where we need to go from here. I sent it in near-mint-mint condition so it must have happened during shipment.

i received his end.

[northicehero99]

#1michigan received his end but it came damaged and not sure where we need to go from here.  I sent it in near-mint-mint condition so it must have happened during shipment. 

i received his end.

If this is the case, then #1 Michigan and dj need to work out a resolution.

#1 Michigan needs to post that he has received and what he would like to do or have you do. Once you figure out a resolution add a post with what is happening (ex: you are sending replacement, or he is accepting the card as is, etc.).

[dj_4dig]

i'm not going to send a replacement of equal value when the damage occurred during shipment. #1michiganfan pm me so we can figure out what to do.

[#1MichiganFan]

I got the card and I'll just stick with the card how it is. It's no big deal. Thanks for the trade

[bob_TCC]

i'm not going to send a replacement of equal value when the damage occurred during shipment.

Please explain why #1MichiganFan should be forced to "accept" damaged cards that were damaged prior to arriving in his mailbox. That type of "customer service" seems hard to defend.

-Bob

[bob_TCC]

I got the card and I'll just stick with the card how it is. It's no big deal.

How bad was the damage and are you certain that you wish to accept the card as is?

-Bob

[dj_4dig]

Please explain why #1MichiganFan should be forced to "accept" damaged cards that were damaged prior to arriving in his mailbox.  That type of "customer service" seems hard to defend.

-Bob

why should i be responsible for cards that were damaged during shipment? i am not responsible for how the mail carrier/delivery handles shipment. i've had plenty of experiences where i received damaged cards and not once did i request add'l cards because i understood that it happens. now if the cards were damaged pre-shipment, then yes, i would absolutely send a replacement.

either way, this type of "customer service" is different. if i was a card shop sending a damanged product during shipment, the insurance that would already be put on that card would take care of it. however, no such thing was agreed upon as this was unexpected.

[bob_TCC]

why should i be responsible for cards that were damaged during shipment?

Your transaction partner is certainly the least responsible for the situation. He shipped cards to you and they arrived in proper condition. You shipped cards to him and they arrived damaged.

Instead of reacting in a way along the lines of "What can I do to make sure you are satisfied?", your reaction was along the lines of "What's a guy to do?" and "Here's what I won't do...".

I guess you and I just have very different views on what should be done to make sure our transaction partners are happy.

-Bob

[dj_4dig]

Your transaction partner is certainly the least responsible for the situation.  He shipped cards to you and they arrived in proper condition.  You shipped cards to him and they arrived damaged.

Instead of reacting in a way along the lines of "What can I do to make sure you are satisfied?", your reaction was along the lines of "What's a guy to do?" and "Here's what I won't do...".

I guess you and I just have very different views on what should be done to make sure our transaction partners are happy.

-Bob

i never said he was responsible, but i also said that i would send him a replacement, just not of equal value so you clearly misstated what i said. i gave a resolution and you mistook it and construed it as if i was saying i was not going to do anything.

we certainly do have different views. either way pls see if you can get in touch with #1michiganfan so i can close the books on this.

[bob_TCC]

i never said he was responsible, but i also said that i would send him a replacement, just not of equal value so you clearly misstated what i said.  i gave a resolution and you mistook it and construed it as if i was saying i was not going to do anything.

Actually, I don't believe I stated anything incorrect and I also never said that you weren't going to do anything. Instead, I simply pointed out that you took the approach of immediately stating what you wouldn't do. As another example, instead of asking dd316 what he would like to do about the fact that you don't have one of the cards in that trade, you have taken the approach of telling him what card he will receive and how you're being more than fair.

So, you're consistent and I'm suggesting that you should re-evaluate your approach to dealing with issues.

We'll see what #1MichiganFan wishes to do with this transaction.

-Bob

[dj_4dig]

Actually, I don't believe I stated anything incorrect and I also never said that you weren't going to do anything.  Instead, I simply pointed out that you took the approach of immediately stating what you wouldn't do.  As another example, instead of asking dd316 what he would like to do about the fact that you don't have one of the cards in that trade, you have taken the approach of telling him what card he will receive and how you're being more than fair.

So, you're consistent and I'm suggesting that you should re-evaluate your approach to dealing with issues.  

We'll see what #1MichiganFan wishes to do with this transaction.

-Bob

1. "Instead, I simply pointed out that you took the approach of immediately stating what you wouldn't do" - you clearly stated that i had no "customer service" because you automatically assumed that i was not going to send him anything. not taking any action as opposed to offering a different solution is very different and again; you made an assumption that just because i stated i wouldn't do something, i was going to ignore the card arrived damaged. wrong assumption you made.

2. "As another example, instead of asking dd316 what he would like to do about the fact that you don't have one of the cards in that trade, you have taken the approach of telling him what card he will receive and how you're being more than fair." - again, another assumption. i pmed dd316 beforehand (as communication is very important to me), and got approval beforehand from dd316 that if i didn't find any #'d cards that he approved, then i would send him a gu even if he already had it.

3. "So, you're consistent and I'm suggesting that you should re-evaluate your approach to dealing with issues. " - consistent with what? the only consistency that i see is the assumptions you make in order for your arguments to make sense.

either way, lmk what the update is regarding this.

[Tarasadie17]

We go by what is posted, not by your PMs. And by reading your posts I totally agree with Bob, you come across as "oh well, deal with it" until you were called on it.

That is our perception. Arguing isn't changing our perception. As matter of fact, your constant debating is increasing my perception that you are difficult to deal with.

[dj_4dig]

We go by what is posted, not by your PMs. And by reading your posts I totally agree with Bob, you come across as "oh well, deal with it" until you were called on it.

That is our perception. Arguing isn't changing our perception. As matter of fact, your constant debating is increasing my perception that you are difficult to deal with.

you didn't get my point. my point is, why make an assumption and make me look like a bad guy with no "customer service," when you don't know all the facts. how about contacting one or the other via pm before posting on here? it's a simple solution that would avoid this kind of argument on a public thread. it's perfectly reasonable to contact either #1michiganfan or myself via pm to find out the entire situation before posting here saying that i wasn't going to do anything. that is what's getting me irked here.

if you ready my first post on here after this issue was bought up, i quote, " i'm not going to send a replacement of equal value when the damage occurred during shipment. #1michiganfan pm me so we can figure out what to do." - this is what i initially posted before i was "called out" on it. my INITIAL post clearly indicates that a resolution will be made. how can the post sound like it's "oh well deal with it" when i offered to send something to make up for it? again, you're making an assumption that clearly is incorrect.

"That is our perception. Arguing isn't changing our perception. As matter of fact, your constant debating is increasing my perception that you are difficult to deal with." - perception and actuality is far and beyond. i'm being difficult in this situation because you both are making bad assumptions. i've made plenty of great deals in the short month i've been here. there are a lot of great members of this board and if you feel that i'm difficult to deal with, then don't deal with me. i've come to mutual understandings with many members even though i've been a member for only a month so really, what you are saying about being difficult has no impact on my ability to get trades done and completed.

again, someone please just get in touch with #1michiganfan to get this done.

[dd316]

2. "As another example, instead of asking dd316 what he would like to do about the fact that you don't have one of the cards in that trade, you have taken the approach of telling him what card he will receive and how you're being more than fair." - again, another assumption.  i pmed dd316 beforehand (as communication is very important to me), and got approval beforehand from dd316 that if i didn't find any #'d cards that he approved, then i would send him a gu even if he already had it. 

Taking this up over in our trade thread, since it doesn't belong here.
http://www.tradingcardcentral.com/forums/?showtopic=41986

[bob_TCC]

I agree that there's no value in debating this further. The record is clearly outlined both in this transaction and your transaction with dd316. Each member can decide what to do with the details.

We'll simply wait to see how #1MichiganFan wishes to proceed at this point.

-Bob

[#1MichiganFan]

How about you just replace it with any current Detroit Pistons or Tigers that you think would make it fair?

[bob_TCC]

How about you just replace it with any current Detroit Pistons or Tigers that you think would make it fair?

Jason,

Did you hear back from dj_4dig?

-Bob

[bob_TCC]

An e-mail reminder to update the status of this transaction was just sent to dj_4dig.