Recently, I purchased a cue and two shafts from rack'em zach'em. Unfortunately there was a discrepancy between his advertisement and the actual items.
His description stated:
"The butt of the cue is in absolute mint condition and the shafts have slight wear and dirt from normal play. Both shafts have NO damage, nicks, dings or dents. They are very smooth and play excellent"
There was indeed damage. I picked up the cue from the post office in the late evening, and I brought the damage to his attention within minutes of leaving the post office. From start to finish, his attitude was dismissive.
Sample photo:
One shaft had the damage in the finish around the entire circumference of the joint collar. Both shafts had numerous nicks and dings, and were not "very smooth". I want to keep this in perspective. The shafts are okay. Nothing is beyond repair, but the shafts were misrepresented.
A true measure of a seller's ethics is how they respond to mistakes or complaints, which are inevitable. Not to mention, it's a red flag if they exhibit a pattern of misrepresenting items, followed by lame excuses and blaming the buyers. It's just not good policy to write words like "brand new" and "NO damage" and then ship out used or damaged items.
He could have very easily have stated "joint collar has chips in the finish, shafts have many nicks and dings but easily repaired" and that would have been fine. I would have known what I was buying.
Lame excuse #1:
First, Zach blamed shipping, but shipping is not to blame.
-- The cue and shafts were securely bubble wrapped and the shipping container was not damaged or indented in the slightest
-- It's impossible that the joint collar could have nicks all around its circumference (see photo) without ANY damage to the joint protector
-- Even if the damage DID occur during shipping (it didn't) how is that my fault as the buyer?
Lame excuse #2:
He implied my photograph was fake. Does he believe I keep spare, identical (but damaged) shafts around? Same joint design, same ring style, same threading... Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...
Lame excuse #3:
He said that I got a good deal, so I should just pay to refinish and repair the shafts myself. I think we can all agree that nobody likes "bait & switch".
Lame excuse #4:
He said that the shafts had been sitting in his case for a year and were unused. Though he never once said he actually inspected the shafts before shipping.
Lame excuse #5:
He initially said that someone else (his "assistant") had shipped the cue. This is often a red flag because it's a lame attempt at deflecting responsibility at best. See lame excuse #4.
I gave Zach many, many (too many) opportunities to discuss this in a fair manner, in private. His attitude was consistently dismissive and unprofessional, and we got nowhere.
I asked to resolve the situation with a small ($50) price adjustment for two reasons...
-- To offset the cost of repairing/refinishing the shafts
-- To offset the lower value of the shafts, should I resell them. Obviously, unlike Zach, I cannot possibly advertise them as "NO damage, dings or dents".
My feedback and reputation speaks for itself. Please see my iTrader comments here:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/itrader.php?u=3221
When I bought the cue+shafts, I went against my better judgment because I remembered he had misrepresented an item to a buyer in the past, as seen here:
"Brand New OB-1 Radial" shaft:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=64590
My mistake for hoping he had learned his lesson. Clearly, he has not.
I'm quite sure Zach probably has had positive transactions with others. Nonetheless, I urge you to form your own opinion and be cautious when dealing with this individual.
As you can guess, I'm not expecting any recourse/refund from Zach. Just wanted to warn others.
His description stated:
"The butt of the cue is in absolute mint condition and the shafts have slight wear and dirt from normal play. Both shafts have NO damage, nicks, dings or dents. They are very smooth and play excellent"
There was indeed damage. I picked up the cue from the post office in the late evening, and I brought the damage to his attention within minutes of leaving the post office. From start to finish, his attitude was dismissive.
Sample photo:
One shaft had the damage in the finish around the entire circumference of the joint collar. Both shafts had numerous nicks and dings, and were not "very smooth". I want to keep this in perspective. The shafts are okay. Nothing is beyond repair, but the shafts were misrepresented.
A true measure of a seller's ethics is how they respond to mistakes or complaints, which are inevitable. Not to mention, it's a red flag if they exhibit a pattern of misrepresenting items, followed by lame excuses and blaming the buyers. It's just not good policy to write words like "brand new" and "NO damage" and then ship out used or damaged items.
He could have very easily have stated "joint collar has chips in the finish, shafts have many nicks and dings but easily repaired" and that would have been fine. I would have known what I was buying.
Lame excuse #1:
First, Zach blamed shipping, but shipping is not to blame.
-- The cue and shafts were securely bubble wrapped and the shipping container was not damaged or indented in the slightest
-- It's impossible that the joint collar could have nicks all around its circumference (see photo) without ANY damage to the joint protector
-- Even if the damage DID occur during shipping (it didn't) how is that my fault as the buyer?
Lame excuse #2:
He implied my photograph was fake. Does he believe I keep spare, identical (but damaged) shafts around? Same joint design, same ring style, same threading... Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...
Lame excuse #3:
He said that I got a good deal, so I should just pay to refinish and repair the shafts myself. I think we can all agree that nobody likes "bait & switch".
Lame excuse #4:
He said that the shafts had been sitting in his case for a year and were unused. Though he never once said he actually inspected the shafts before shipping.
Lame excuse #5:
He initially said that someone else (his "assistant") had shipped the cue. This is often a red flag because it's a lame attempt at deflecting responsibility at best. See lame excuse #4.
I gave Zach many, many (too many) opportunities to discuss this in a fair manner, in private. His attitude was consistently dismissive and unprofessional, and we got nowhere.
I asked to resolve the situation with a small ($50) price adjustment for two reasons...
-- To offset the cost of repairing/refinishing the shafts
-- To offset the lower value of the shafts, should I resell them. Obviously, unlike Zach, I cannot possibly advertise them as "NO damage, dings or dents".
My feedback and reputation speaks for itself. Please see my iTrader comments here:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/itrader.php?u=3221
When I bought the cue+shafts, I went against my better judgment because I remembered he had misrepresented an item to a buyer in the past, as seen here:
"Brand New OB-1 Radial" shaft:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=64590
My mistake for hoping he had learned his lesson. Clearly, he has not.
I'm quite sure Zach probably has had positive transactions with others. Nonetheless, I urge you to form your own opinion and be cautious when dealing with this individual.
As you can guess, I'm not expecting any recourse/refund from Zach. Just wanted to warn others.
