"pcheltenham" - response

In June 2002, one buyer informed this seller that all the certificates requested for the "high value" stamps showed that the stamps had all been forged or altered in some way, and suggested that the seller strengthen his disclaimer to include that previous lots have been certified as forgeries. The seller responded with the following (reference to specific bids, purchases, lots certified, etc have been omitted):

"... We have discussed that I make the scan and push the buttons. I can hardly remember any stamp that has been listed as any particular issue or listed with any condition. As you know, it is up to you to make the decicision [sic] of what you are bidding on. And I do that precisely for the reason we are discussing now. I have no interest in getting into discussions, arguments, intellectual debates and the like with people, especially when I can't win. Nothing is offered with any specific representations, or any representation at all for that matter. And everything is offered for $1. I don't bid people up. They bid what they want and decide what they decide that item is. If they are right, they are right, if they are wrong, they are wrong...

... You said you sent stamps for certification and they came back differently from the way you perceived, or possibly hoped, they would. I would assume that had your errors in classification, or for whatever reason they came back differently than you thought, had they been obvious misclassifications on your part, you would have noticed that upon receipt and you wouldn't have wasted the money certifying them...

... There are too many stamps to count here, I don't have any doubts that some of them will be fiddled with, or repaired, or altered, or whatever else is done to stamps to make them sell for more, and I can be just as confident in saying that that is probably the case in every stamp collection ever accumulated. I have no intention or desire to pack up and ship each and every one of these stamps in for certification. Were I to do it, I probably would get an enormously higher result...

... As to your idea of me stating that some stamps have come back with certificates differing from what YOU thought they were, that is ridiculous. Why don't YOU just then place in YOUR advertisments, " Please certify all stamps that you buy from me, for without certification, I am possibly or likely to be incorrect in my initial identification." ...

... But if you play the game, you play the game. You get to keep the good ones, and at the same time, you get to keep the bad ones... "

On 31 August and 1 September 2002, "pcheltenham" received the following negative feedback comments from a "0" feedback bidder who no doubt had read this article and wished to warn other bidders:

Complaint : Bought by seller on eBay, altered, then relisted with fraudulent description.

Response by pcheltenham - What a Loon. Didn't even pay yet. Described as faulty. Go figure?

Follow-up by ecivon - Seller consistently repairs/alters stamps then offers with fraudulent fairytale

Complaint : Considerable fraudulent alterations done by this seller on most lots offered.

These negatives have subsequently been removed from "pcheltenham"'s feedback.

On 5 September, possibly prompted by the above, "pcheltenham"'s 14 new 3-day private auction listings carried the following lengthy addition (which is worth comparing to the similarly worded disclaimer of "schuylerac"):

" I NOW HAVE OVER 1350 positive feedbacks. I have received, and noticed some complaints, not from any actual buyers. The complaint seems to be about the descriptions, or lack of, and that it possibly could be misleading. Although my buyers obviously don't need clarification, here goes. There are two kinds of stamps in my opinion. Used and unsed. They are either sound or not sound. I don't distinguish why it isn't sound, for to me it simply is or isn't. Generally the word fault is used. Fault, in a dictionary of the English language, is " a defect or imperfection". That could and does include anything that anyone could possibly perceive as one or the other. I don't prescribe to any rating system which holds one type of fault more odious than that other type of fault, or devalues the stamp more in one situation over another situation, there are far to many opinions as it is. As the description states, IT IS THE OBLIGATION OF THE BUYER TO DETERMINE WHICH STAMP IT IS, AND TO DETERMINE IT'S CONDITION, AND SUBSEQUENTLY THE BUYERS DECISION ON HOW MUCH HE IS WILLING TO PAY FOR IT. Everything is started at $1 and is worth at least that $1 to somebody. Occaisonally the word JUNKY or JUNK is used. In the dictionary it says " worthless". But as said, one man's junk is another man's treasure. It's up to you to decide. Some people have stated the scan isn't enough for them to make a decision. My position is it would then be imprudent for him to bid and he shouldn't bid. It is not impossible to make a return, only a few have been requested and only a few have been granted. If your request is pompous or abusive, don't even bother. I don't deal well with discourteous people. If you have a legitimate reason, and you will know if it is legitimate, as will I, then ask. So I will state the following in a way no-one can or should misunderstand. YOU ARE BUYING A PIG IN A POKE. And so far 1350++ feedbacks show that the PIG IN THE POKE was very satisfactory to the buyer. So hopefully this is enough to satisfy all those who fear that my "senseless and brainless" buyers( Please note, not my perception but theirs) are being mislead. If any of these conditions of sale are not in agreement with you, then don't bid. A bid in order to just be able to leave a negative feedback only labels you for what you are--Just a Crank. "

'Fraud on eBay - exposed!' article