Selling dispute. Please comment.

Mint.... Original manual....
Seller should have checked to make sure.
These are seemingly important to this buyer, and might have been the swaying factor in his purchase.
The seller is fully responsible for the satisfaction of the transaction. Even if it's something out of his hands like shipping damage. So, no matter how unreasonable we think the buyer is, the item was misrepresented.

Check out my feedback on here and ebay. It isn't perfect for no reason. 5.0 on my seller dashboard also. I know how to treat buyers, but never let them walk all over me. Lots of buyers want everything and haven't got the means, so they will use any excuse to get their money back or something for free. I as a buyer do want original manuals if it's possible and original boxes because it does help to get items sold, especially Linn products. As far as me being a fair seller, my attitude is if you don't have the means butt out.

"Mint.... Original manual....
Seller should have checked to make sure."

I never said anything about the manual in the description. When you fill out the classified ad form on audiogon there is a checkbox for "manual included". I checked that box. You see, there were in fact various documents in the boxes that were from the manufacturer. They were inside large white envelopes. I peeked inside the envelopes saw some docs in there and said to myself "Ahh, those much be the docs that come with the amp". So when I checked the "manual included" box I really meant was that the buyer would get whatever paper docs were originally in the box. Not so much that they would specifically be a manual. After speaking with the manufacturer, I really think the buyer DID in fact get whatever is originally included in the box. They don't put manuals in the box, but there is some paperwork.

Rrog:

I must take exception to the points you make in your post.

First, you state that "... the first thing that may enter the buyer's mind is, what else is the seller lying about." In order for a lie to occur there must be a misrepresentation of the facts AND a purposeful attempt to deceive. Although the seller did misrepresent the facts, I truly do not believe he was trying to be deceptive. I do not for one minute think that when he checked that Audiogon box he thought to himself, "I'm really going to screw this guy!". Also, absent a severe psychological condition, I don't belive a buyer would assume that a fraud had been perpetrated based soley on a missing manual! You, however, have no problem in suggesting that is exactly what the buyer may have thought.

Secondly, you state that "The real problem here is Jax misrepresented what he was selling." Again, I beg to differ. Although the seller's action was clearly the ORIGIN of the problem, the "real problem" (to use your words) is the buyers unreasonable response to the sellers well intentioned, bend-over-backwards attempts to rectify the situation. While the seller is obviously trying to accomodate, the words from the buyer's emails convey the message he will have to be dragged to a compromise kicking and screaming. That, my friend, is THE REAL PROBLEM!

Finally, if this dispute was heard in a court of law I would find immediately for the buyer. I would then award him $1.00 in damages and tell him to consider himself lucky that the law does not allow a lesser award.

On the otherhand, if this case was tried in the court of public opinion the seller wins hands down. In fact, if that court was convened in Wyoming or Montana the official transcript reads, "The buyer acted like a horses a$$, case dismissed!".

Shoff, you make some good points, but I would add that if this were Wyoming or Montana (or a lot of other places), the seller would have worked this out with the buyer and been done with it without subjecting the whole pitiful experience to the court of public opinion.

IMO, the real problem is that both buyer and seller would rather throw nuts at each other than own up and move on. Jaxwired's original talk about

various papers from the manufacturer in the boxes

and especially his more recent post

So when I checked the "manual included" box I really meant was that the buyer would get whatever paper docs were originally in the box. Not so much that they would specifically be a manual.

is absolute BS, and simply a justification to himself (and to us) that he didn't "actually" screw up by not verifying the original manual was in the box before listing the ad or shipping the amps. I get it, we all screw up sometimes, but quit whining about it and resolve it.

A review of the Audiogon "Seller's Checklist" shows "Do you have the owner's manual?" being one of the questions to answer. In this case the seller did not, but checked that he did. Regardless that 99 out of 100 of us would have happily accepted the pdf manual, and regardless that the buyer comes off as an ass-wipe from his e-mails, the fact remains that the seller did not complete his commitment. Therefore, this boils down to either the buyer accepting the proposed solution (pdf manual), or the seller accepting the return of the amps.

BTW, when you post an ad, the seller's checkbox reads "Owner's Manual Included" but the actual ad lists the manual under "Original Accessories." The absence of the word "original" in the ad posting checkbox and the inclusion of "original" in the listing is a discrepancy that Audiogon should fix, especially after this thread.