Ebay seller: mark.audacity

rawhead · Expire: 2014-04-29

Hi everybody.

This is a transaction that occurred to me in another forum (Large Format Photography), but I wanted to raise awareness here, as the seller also sells on Ebay (ID: mark.audacity).

My first bad experience selling and buying in these forums (and here I'm including all the forums I frequent including here, APUG, Large Format Photography, Luminous-Landscape, Photo.net, GetDPI, PentaxForums, etc) in a very long time happened today.

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...via-QuickLoads

Here is the listing. Pretty much all the information you need to know is there.

The gist: I purchased 19 frames of Polaroid Type 55 film advertised as "verified functional". I received the batch today, and the very first frame I tested had a pod that would not break AT ALL, even after repeated squeezing with my fingers after opening up the envelope. If one frame is in that state, then I'm pretty confident the rest are going to be just as unusable. I asked for a refund, and offered to ship back the remaining 18 frames if he so desired. He denied.

I'm not fabricating or dramatizing anything, and the seller himself agrees that what I've written there is factual. The seller did revise his post several times, so I just want to point out that in the original listing, there was no warning about the risks involved, and instead there was a rather explicit mention that the film, 19 frames of T55, was "verified functional".

It made sense, since it was missing a frame (19 instead of 20); I figured that he took out a frame from the batch and made a test shot before putting up the ad. In retrospect, that is probably not what happened; my guess is that instead the "verification" took place a long time ago and the film died in his fridge at some point since then.

There is the off-chance that, like the seller suggests, the film was "frozen" in transit. I am in Boston, I admit that. But even if that were the case, I would argue that the blame should lie with the seller who packaged it inadequately, rather than the buyer who, not reading the fine print in the seller's listing, "declined" to purchase insurance.

Regardless of where the damage occurred, if an item that a buyer purchases arrives DOA, then I just don't think that the buyer can be held responsible. Perhaps some of you will disagree, I don't know.

I'm not here to ask for persecution of the seller, consolation, or even understanding.

I just want people to know that if you deal with Mr. Mark Audacity of Houston Texas, Ebay ID: mark.audacity, Paypal ID: markaudacity@gmail.com, then what you see in the thread linked above is the kind of treatment that you will be getting.

Thanks.

rawhead · Expire: 2014-04-29

Hmm, well, the moderator gods at LF Photography apparently decided that deleting said thread and sweeping everything under the rug under the rubric of "For Sales/Wanted is at your own risk" is the best course of action. Now it's gone� Sad

Fortunately, I've kept a record of the thread as a PDF, with all the comments except for the last two in which a fellow member confirmed that "freezing" will not render the pods of a Type 55 useless.

http://pdfcast.org/pdf/thread-at-lf-forums

rawhead · Expire: 2014-04-29

Well, while he couldn't stop bitching and moaning and doing his best to try to make *me* feel bad about it, the seller did come around to give me a full refund so I feel obliged to make a note of it here.

It's a bit sad it took him for me to set up a couple of threads (one at LF Photo, and one here, though I don't know if he's aware of this one) to come around, but he also clearly isn't/wasn't some scammer trying to make a quick buck and disappear.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Annoying for sure, I have no clue at all about polaroid , how sensetive to freezing, normal film surely not , except very old emulsions they can get fragile. In my opinion seller should know what he sell and if cold weather makes danger not ship. About return to not accept return is un-acceptable me why ? Buyer can't try it buyer did trust seller, so seller must do his best include return and refund, if return did happen do seller made mistake , postal cost is paid by seller, if buyer simple change his mind postal cost is paid by buyer on both way. I think this is fair trade..

martinsmith99 · Expire: 2013-11-18

Which is why I spend most of my online forum time here. Laughing

Farside · Expire: 2013-12-27

Amazing how the same techniques crop up time after time from the same types of individuals - trying to make the buyer feel 'embarrassed', what a crock.
Good work on guilting him into a refund, though.
I had a very recent experience with a seller of loudspeakers; despite numerous emails over a fortnight and him assuring me they were in transit, it turned out they'd only been despatched two days before they arrived here - the idiot failed to take into account that his drop-ship supplier date-mark all their packages.
Still, I should have smelled a rat, dealing with a failed Disc Jockey.
No matter, they're now working and sounding good. Smile