Telamon wrote:
In article ,
"Mark S. Holden" wrote:


Telamon wrote:


I liked this:
"This is all done primarily to protect me from the people who buy food
items, consume them, and want to send it back to me as non-working and
expect a refund."


There are those who have said what they bought amounted to "used food".


Sorry to hear that. Did they get their money back?


My impression is some do, and some don't.

I'm sure contacting him right away and being polite but firm helps.

But he doesn't refund shipping and handling if you return something and
that can be considerable on a boatanchor.

Anyone can make an honest mistake with a description - but if there's a
sign of intentional misrepresentation (pictures taken from angles to
hide serious damage on a radio described as "collector quality", or
something that's described as working like new but tubes were in wrong
sockets resulting in a fire when you turned it on) the seller should be
refunding for shipping - both ways.

I see nothing wrong with him buying radios that are poorly described and
reselling them with a better description. But he appears he'll buy a
radio thats honestly described warts and all, and then resell it with
phrases like "like new", "I can not fault this" and "collector quality".

His negative and neutral feedback can be entertaining to read.

http://www.toolhaus.org/cgi-bin/negs...rn=Received+by

Unfortunately, since he uses private auctions, you can't read the item
descriptions to evaluate if they were honest.

You can check the feedback of folks who left him negs, and he almost
always retaliates.