"Snip" - the first bad deal I've had on the hub!

[Edge_Design]

This is unfortunately a long story, but is basically a warning to anyone who might buy equipment from this hubber in the future.

 

Snip posted an ad looking to swap a set of used Zipp tubbies for clinchers. I import the Edge wheels and thought it was a good opportunity to get another set of them out on the road. I had no intention of using the Zipps as I already had EC90SLX's and Bora Ultra's, but figured I would sell them off quickly and get most of my money back on the Edge wheels.

 

She was very keen and agreed to the swap and after a few pics were exchanged and she confirmed the Zipps were dimpled versions and were in good condition, we went ahead with it.

 

I received them and didn't really have time to look closely at them (yes, that is probably not the best thing to do on my side, but as I haven't been screwed by sellers in the past, I've become a bit to trusting of people). I advertised them on the hub almost immediately and they took a little while to sell, but someone bought them from me in the end. He immediately took them for a service as I couldn't give him much history on the wheels. 2 Days later he contacted me to say the mechanic told him there was a small crack on the braking surface of the one rim, the rear bearings needed replacing, the cassette that came with them was far past being usable and the one tubbie wasn't glued straight. I obviously had to refund him in full as I can't sell something in that sort of condition.

 

I contacted Snip who informed me she had been told by a mechanic the bearings were dry, but this wasn't a problem (???) and that she hadn't noticed the crack, but I had seen the photo's before accepting the wheels so it is my problem now as I should have seen a tiny hairline crack in the braking surface of the wheels on a low resolution photo of the entire wheel (I've attached a pic of the crack below so you can see what I mean)! Oh, and it could have been caused by the post office (???), crack a rim (with a tyre fitted) inside a box, not so sure about that... And to top it all off, they aren't dimpled rims, they are much older versions as well (as someone not very clued up on Zipps, I had taken her word for it)!

 

I have tried to stick to facts completely above and not distort anything here or call people names etc.

 

I intend on contacting a lawyer during this week regarding the matter, but if there is anyone on the hub who can assist me with information on the possible claim I have against someone for selling me faulty goods and providing an incorrect description of them, please let me know (I'm looking for someone who genuinely knows and not just hubbers guesswork if possible as I am out almost R7k here which I can't afford to throw away).

 

 

* If anyone has any good photo editing skills, please contact me too. I coincidentally took pics of the wheels/rims a week after I got the wheels when I advertised them for sale. I can see the crack in the picture, but can't get it clear enough to be definitive (the pics were taken with my phone unfortunately!). That is pretty solid evidence that the crack was there when I received them and not a new thing from sitting around, but would prefer it to be clearer before using it.

Edited February 27, 2011 by Edge_Design

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

That's a *** draw mate, hope you come right...

[javadude]

Jeez, that really sucks. Snip, you are a scumbag, even if you are a girl.

[Edge_Design]

Thanks guys, really hoping there is a qualified lawyer on the hub who reads this as I'm not exactly in a position to fork out a fortune on legal advice with my work contract ending tomorrow, but I will do it if I have to just on principle... I try my best to be an honest seller and always offer people the opportunity to return goods if anything isn't as I've described (as I did in this case), but I do expect a similar thing in return from people if it's something material like in this case where the wheels are actually completely unusable. I swapped brand new wheels for these and would even be willing to just swap them back even though they're obviously used by now...

[doris]

ED sorry to state the obvious man however if you cannot prove these were cracked / warn etc when you got them and not cracked by your dog or you transporting them then sorry amn I do not think you have a leg to stand on except for common deceny from snip to confess to a dodgey deal in the first place

 

sorry man for the situation you in

[Climate]

Sent you PM ...

[Edge_Design]

ED sorry to state the obvious man however if you cannot prove these were cracked / warn etc when you got them and not cracked by your dog or you transporting them then sorry amn I do not think you have a leg to stand on except for common deceny from snip to confess to a dodgey deal in the first place

 

sorry man for the situation you in

 

She has confessed to knowing the bearings in the rear wheel were shot and I have it in writing that she claimed them to be much more recent models than they actually are... Other than that I suppose I have people who can vouch for the fact that they were stored in a safe environment at the back of a room in a box from when I received them and that they were not used at all.

[Inusc]

Thats really K@K!

[Capricorn]

i wonder if you are protected under the recently announced updated consumer protection act, because hidden under section 61 or 63, states claims using the new act can be back dated to the date of first issue of the act, which was April 2010, even though the act only comes into force on 1 April 2011, meaning this little dilemma is covered by the new act even though it preceded 1 April 2011..

 

There is an element here of unintended misrepresentation that should allow you a full refund. But get a wigged_one to sort that one out.

Edited February 27, 2011 by Capricorn

[Capricorn]

and can the lawyers here rather spell it out for everyone in the thread instead of using PM, purdyplease?

[bontie]

I am no lawyer, but AFAIK a buyer and seller needs to agree on a couple of things, one of them being the goods - "koopsaak" as described in the acts. It is obvious that the buyer and seller agreed on the goods, BUT on a wheelset much newer than the ones Edge eventually received.

If my thinking is correct, it is misrepresentation on the side of the seller and the transaction is regarded as null and void.

 

It is like selling a E300 Merc to someone, who then finds out 2 days later that the actual product is an old E320...

 

Good luck Edge

[Edge_Design]

and can the lawyers here rather spell it out for everyone in the thread instead of using PM, purdyplease?

 

No lawyers yet! Will let you know once I have some genuinely useful, factual information at I think a lot of hubbers should know their rights with regards to the transactions done on here.

 

For everyone: Please understand, I am not accusing her of knowing about the crack and selling the wheels (it is a very small crack which neither myself nor the guy I sold them to notice on first inspection). That would be a criminal case probably if that were the case (that must count as fraud to knowingly sell faulty goods and make blatantly make false representations regarding their condition). I am assuming it was accidental and unintentional (except for the bearings which she was aware of and didn't communicate and presumably the age/model of the wheels).

[Edge_Design]

I am no lawyer, but AFAIK a buyer and seller needs to agree on a couple of things, one of them being the goods - "koopsaak" as described in the acts. It is obvious that the buyer and seller agreed on the goods, BUT on a wheelset much newer than the ones Edge eventually received.

If my thinking is correct, it is misrepresentation on the side of the seller and the transaction is regarded as null and void.

 

It is like selling a E300 Merc to someone, who then finds out 2 days later that the actual product is an old E320...

 

Good luck Edge

 

That would be my assumption as well, but then add that the E320 does not run which takes it to an entire different level!

[Edge_Design]

Just to clarify, this is the picture I was meant to have seen the crack in (it also happens to be the wrong side of the wheel, but you couldn't really tell that from the pic!).

 

[Capricorn]

did you ask if there any issues with any of the items purchases PRIOR to taking delivery thereof, to which the response was...?

 

also, was this an 'as is'/'voetstoots' sale, as in was as is/voetstoots mentioned at any time by the seller?

Edited February 27, 2011 by Capricorn

[EigerSA]

There's not much you can do about the crack I don't think. The seller could very easily have claimed the crack occurred while they were in your possession, and you couldn't prove otherwise. As for the the wrong type wheels, if she advertised the wheels as being a specific type and on receipt they were of a different type, then you should've asked for your money back right away. The real problem lies in the fact that you didn't immediately ask for your money back, she could argue that by not immediately contacting her and asking for your money back, you implicitly accepted what was given - going to be really hard for you to prove otherwise, especially if you sold them on to someone else. I really hope you come right, speak to your legal advisor and report back, would be interesting to see how this goes. Personally I think the seller should just give you at least part of your money back.