Mark at Bassdirect

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='peteb' post='1197584' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:11 PM']As I understand it, the guy has bought a bass that he believes not to be genuine but has since traded it on to someone across the other side of Europe[/quote]
Really? Then IMO it changes things significantly...

[simon1964]

[quote name='peteb' post='1197566' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:04 PM']I take the point that the shop is responsible for the identity of what it sells but if I was Mark I might be a bit pi***d off that this is being debated in public among many of his potential customers when a) he will feel like he acted in a reasonable manner, and there is clearly more to this than meets the eye……[/quote]

But there are retailers criticised almost daily on here. If this was Music Ground or The Bass Cellar nobody would bat an eyelid, save to add their own negative experiences.

Edit - its only fair for me to add that I have bought from Bass Direct, and was very satisfied with the service. But I don't think it can be right that a retailer should be beyond criticism just because the owner is a Basschat member.

Edited April 12, 2011 by simon1964

[neepheid]

Someone gets bad service, they tell ten friends, who in turn tell ten of their friends etc. This is just a speeded up version. I had months of rotten service from Orange broadband and you bet your backside I've been telling anyone who'll listen how godawfully inept they are. Oh look, I've just done it on an internet forum. Now I've gone and done it.

[ThomBassmonkey]

The underlying point of this thread is that the facts are out in the open and agreed on by buyer and seller. If that was still being debated, it shouldn't be done publically as people should know both sides of the story before forming an opinion.

It's a discussion on whether or not we feel either party did the right thing. If they're both still talking then there's still a possible good outcome waiting to happen and the mood of the thread could shift a lot.

However you look at it, both parties have made where they stand clear and it's up to readers to take from that what they will. No one's saying Mark's deliberately tried to mis-sell the bass or that he's deliberately trying to cause problems.

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='peteb' post='1197584' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:11 PM']As I understand it, the guy has bought a bass that he believes not to be genuine but has since traded it on to someone across the other side of Europe[/quote]
But not to try and diddle him! The geography is irrelevant other than someone will have to pay to post it back.

[Doctor J]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='1197585' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:11 PM']Yes and if Mark had refunded him asap once the problem arose followed by a call to his mate to discuss it privately between them we would all be praising him , we have before and I'm sure we will again on another bass related product, Although this may be the next TIM type of quip?[/quote]
As I understand it, Mark has not had the opportunity to inspect the bass in person since the accusations were made. I'm not sure you'd hand out a refund without getting the bass back either?

[Soliloquy]

Shops can and do make mistakes. I remember another bass shop advertising a Toby Pro 6 string bass as being a genuine Tobias a couple of years ago. I almost paid well over £1000 for it, I did some research first and realised their mistake.

Oh and Beedster, my thread about Stringsdirect and this are totally different. This is accusing someone of dishonesty, my thread was about a messed up order.

[Johngh]

[quote name='peteb' post='1197584' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:11 PM']As I understand it, the guy has bought a bass that he believes not to be genuine but has since traded it on to someone across the other side of Europe[/quote]


Wrong.

From what I understand, it didn't come to light that the body was not genuine until after it was traded. The new owner had it correctly checked out and it was found that the body was from a different year to the neck.

[wateroftyne]

I reckon this should be locked again, as we're not in possession of the true facts.

[birdy]

[quote name='peteb' post='1197584' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:11 PM']As I understand it, the guy has bought a bass that he believes not to be genuine but has since traded it on to someone across the other side of Europe[/quote]

I suspect this is the sticking point - the fact that the bass is now in Bulgaria (I could be wrong). If I were Mark I would want absolute proof that the bass and pictures were the one I had sold. Playing devils advocate at what point does Mark cease to be responsible for the bass. Lets imagine that the guy in Bulgaria did not spot it was a dud and sold it to someone in Norway a year later - should Mark still refund? Where does the guy who Mark bought the bass stand on this morally?
This is a lot more complex than meets the eye in many ways and I expect Marks stance is based on ensuring he is not ripped off. I am in no way saying that anyone is trying to rip anyone off but I would want to know all the facts before I passed judgement either way. Its a shame that this could not have been resolved privately but none of us know the facts of who said what to whom or what has been said prior to this.

[Beedster]

[quote name='peteb' post='1197584' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:11 PM']As I understand it, the guy has bought a bass that he believes not to be genuine but has since traded it on to someone across the other side of Europe[/quote]

That was explained in the other thread (now deleted), so IMO not really 'more than meets the eye'. Either way, I don't think it changes anything as Mark has acknowledged that he didn't check the authenticity of the bass in question, and although the OP has offered to refund the overseas seller, Mark hasn't offered to do the same.

[Doctor J]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='1197598' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:16 PM']I reckon this should be locked again, as we're not in possession of the true facts.[/quote]

Best suggestion so far.

Edited April 12, 2011 by Doctor J

[steve-soar]

And now for a brief interlude.

[ThomBassmonkey]

[quote name='Soliloquy' post='1197594' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:15 PM']This is accusing someone of dishonesty, my thread was about a messed up order.[/quote]

I don't think anyone's said Mark's been dishonest. He's made a mistake (everyone does it and I think everyone in this thread agrees that that's probably the case here), the problem Truckstop is having is with wanting a refund because the bass was mis-sold (whether deliberately or not).

[Soliloquy]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='1197598' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:16 PM']I reckon this should be locked again, as we're not in possession of the true facts.[/quote]

Which is why threads like this are totally wrong IMO. It is strictly between Mark and the buyer, and there's now someone else owning the bass.

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='Doctor J' post='1197593' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:15 PM']As I understand it, Mark has not had the opportunity to inspect the bass in person since the accusations were made. I'm not sure you'd hand out a refund without getting the bass back either?[/quote]
Wrong, As I see it Mark accepts this to be said bass but doesn't agree a refund is in order that's very different. The ins and outs have already been agreed between both parties.

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='Beedster' post='1197602' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:17 PM']Although the OP has offered to refund the overseas seller, Mark hasn't offered to do the same.[/quote]
I don't think Mark should refund the overseas buyer. It wasn't his bass at the time it was traded.

Edited April 12, 2011 by wateroftyne

[simon1964]

[quote name='Soliloquy' post='1197594' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:15 PM']Oh and Beedster, my thread about Stringsdirect and this are totally different. This is accusing someone of dishonesty, my thread was about a messed up order.[/quote]

Unless I've missed a post I don't think anyone has been accused of dishonesty. In at least two of my posts, I've expressly said that it clearly was an honest mistake IMO.

Edited April 12, 2011 by simon1964

[Beedster]

[quote name='Soliloquy' post='1197594' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:15 PM']Oh and Beedster, my thread about Stringsdirect and this are totally different. This is accusing someone of dishonesty, my thread was about a messed up order.[/quote]

Not really, you identify a retailer by name and point out a mistake they made, but being about a few strings, it just didn't attract quite the same interest. Unless I'm mistake, the motivation was however the same.... I'm not having a go at you, but you can't make exceptions just because this retailer is your mate.

[peteb]

[quote name='birdy' post='1197600' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:17 PM']I suspect this is the sticking point - the fact that the bass is now in Bulgaria (I could be wrong). If I were Mark I would want absolute proof that the bass and pictures were the one I had sold. Playing devils advocate at what point does Mark cease to be responsible for the bass. Lets imagine that the guy in Bulgaria did not spot it was a dud and sold it to someone in Norway a year later - should Mark still refund? Where does the guy who Mark bought the bass stand on this morally?
This is a lot more complex than meets the eye in many ways and I expect Marks stance is based on ensuring he is not ripped off. I am in no way saying that anyone is trying to rip anyone off but I would want to know all the facts before I passed judgement either way. Its a shame that this could not have been resolved privately but none of us know the facts of who said what to whom or what has been said prior to this.[/quote]
+1 - exactly

[Beedster]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='1197613' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:19 PM']I don't think Mark should refund the overseas buyer. It wasn't his bass at the time it was traded.[/quote]

I think the OP is getting it back (at some expense as he has to pay shipping for the two basses) and was hoping that BD would at least refund him on the '83. That was the gist of the other thread AFAIR.

[Gareth Hughes]

TIM!!!!!!

oh, and 78 users. That's all I have to add to this.

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='Beedster' post='1197621' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:22 PM']I think the OP is getting it back (at some expense as he has to pay shipping for the two basses) and was hoping that BD would at least refund him on the '83. That was the gist of the other thread AFAIR.[/quote]
Ah, I didn't see the other thread.

But still, the situation isn't as straightforward (and therefore clear-cut) as suggested in the OP. It's not like he's bought the bass, got it home and realised within a week or so that it's not what he thought it was.

Again... will someone lock this thread so I can go to bed? Please?

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='1197613' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:19 PM']I don't think Mark should refund the overseas buyer. It wasn't his bass at the time it was traded.[/quote]
He means to Alex not the Bulgarian, Pass the parcel if you like.


I think some of us know bits from the previous thread that others don't which may or may not sway opinions in different directions? But it's not right for anyone else to re post Alex's old topic in their words.

[birdy]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='1197612' date='Apr 12 2011, 11:19 PM']Wrong, As I see it Mark accepts this to be said bass but doesn't agree a refund is in order that's very different. The ins and outs have already been agreed between both parties.[/quote]

We don't know that for sure though do we? Maybe we do, its late and I have lost the plot with this thread :-)