Why did that post by oppressor get locked ?

Illegal agreed upon terms hold NO validity. Yes frustrated, I can understand, but to come on here acting like a 12 year old...that is uncalled for. All he had to do was not accept the packages and tell De Op why and I am sure a refund would have been given, if it wasn't...then that is the time to act. All this whining and filing chargebacks locking out anothers ability to conduct transactions is ridiculous. Murdoch is on my little black list for his actions in this matter. You can still be right, but go about it the wrong way.
 
So much energy expended over a 2 person dispute.....

I can't really see what he problem is in sending knives outside the US or anywhere else? Paypal or credit card should be secure,don't send anything till you have the payment and send it insured to obviate delivery scams.
 
Gravelface said:
Illegal agreed upon terms hold NO validity.
Click to expand...


I guess we differ in that if I give my word, legal or not, I will stand beside it. If I have moral problems with it I don't give my word or agree to it in the first place. But that's me and I'm admittedly a bit weird.:cool:
 
OilMan said:
I guess we differ in that if I give my word, legal or not, I will stand beside it. If I have moral problems with it I don't give my word or agree to it in the first place. But that's me and I'm admittedly a bit weird.:cool:
Click to expand...

Well said. It is not cool to change terms mid-race then expect the buyer to accept it. If Murdoch is a scum bag for requesting a lower declared value then what does it make De Op for agreeing to those terms in the first place? It is a very common occurence for buyers outside the US to request that the declared value be less than it actually is. Is this really that much of a surprise to people here? If we Americans had to endure the obscene taxation that folks in other parts of the world do I'm certain many would do likewise. I have zero problem honoring this request AS LONG as the buyer in turn agrees to accept all responsibility if package is lost, stolen or seized. Some here are likening a request to declare lower value on a customs form to crimes against humanity or smuggling plutonium through customs, LOL. For those morally outraged at the high crimes committed by Murdoch: how many of you declare purchases that you have made online come tax time on your state income tax return? In most states you are required to declare a dollar figure for internet purchases and then pay state sales taxes on those purchases. I'm sure everyone condemning Murduch pulls out their internet knife purchase receipts come tax time and religiously declares this amount on their state income tax return correct?
 
gator68 said:
Well, the Chris Reeve was represented as being a special run, 1 of 4, no more to be made. Turns out it was just engraving requested by a customer who later changed his mind, and was not a special or custom knife in any other way. "never to made again with serial #s for the public." De Oppresso Liber may not have known this -- but the knife was not as represented. When the knife is being sold for more than double what CRK charges, one would think it was special...

It sounds like this wasn't handled very well by Murdoch, but it also sounds like this would have fallen apart anyway.
Click to expand...

the crk seemed to be represented in good faith, and im sure, once presented with evidence contradicting his listing, oppresso would have made ammends.

people disagree all the time, and often over money. oppresso probably should have notified murdoch of the declaration, assuming murdoch is telling the truth. we have no evidence of this.

murdoch should not have created a fraudulent claim, of fraud! if he wasnt happy there are far better ways to resolve the dispute.

he is apparantly out no money, yet has created problems for oppresso by reporting to paypal he was the victim of fraud. no where has he supported these claims.

one knife was mistakenly presented as something it apparantly is not. the other has been 'verified' by an expert to be exactly what it was claimed to be.
an error in good faith is not fraud.
 
I am not flaming Murdoch for asking DE OP to lower the value, ...I have done it for several folks all over the world. My problem is that Murdoch is acting like a complete Tool. He says how he can't afford the $600 taxes and then proceeds to make bets with folks up to 10k and then says that De Op can have the knives and money......he is a tool/troll/clown and will never be able to buy from several folks here. Then he wants his money back for his Gold membership which has taken 4 weeks and never set up....I wonder if he did a charge back on that also?

As long as the person understands that I can't insure the package if I declare it under $50 and depending on how it is shipped, I can't get a decent tracking number and so if it is lost or whatever it is all on them and no act will be taken against me as a result, then I have no problem with it. As far as I am concerned...once they pay for it it is theirs and I will send it however they like.
 
I think that the majority of people posting here are not trying to find out the facts but instead have a witch hunt.

Answer me this...

:Why is everybody asking me to post proof when it was Oppressor who started the original thread accusing me of foul play,

:Why is nobody asking him to prove that he never originally agreed to lower the charge.

:Why is no one asking him to prove that the Busse is a prototype , someone said it was rare not a Prototype unless i missed this somewhere.

And why does he not have to prove that he never told me the Y.C. stood for Yarborough Custom, and for any doubters for what the Y.C. stands for then email Chris Reeve and ask him yourself.

Why do i have to post all this evidence, why i am in the dock guilty as charged while he gets to make an accusation and not have to prove anything.

Gravelface you seem to be the latest troll who has jumped on the bandwagon and i take it that it is a case of gravelface by name gravelface by nature so i will ask you this... please show us all exactly where i said i could not afford the charges ? i can afford them that is not the reason i asked him to lower them in the first case.


This has got to the stage where people are quoting me on saying things that i never said at all.
 
I will not be posting in this topic again and will leave you to argue among yourselves.

As far as i am concerned this is closed as it was resolved today.

I hope that the rest of the Conus and non Conus members can get back to business as usual, don't worry i will close the door on my way out.






KILT, n. A costume sometimes worn by Scotchmen in America and Americans in Scotland.
 
"3: I asked you before i bought the knives that i needed you to ship them to me with a low value as i would be out of the country and would not be able to pay any extra charges."


From your first post...it sounds to me like you either can't afford them or too stupid to give some one else them to pay for them in your absence, but since you are giving De Op both the knives and the money....I guess you are rolling in the money!
 
murdoch123 said:
:Why is everybody asking me to post proof when it was Oppressor who started the original thread accusing me of foul play,
Click to expand...

Because you made the accusation about the "low value" thing, that's why folks expect YOU to back it up.

murdoch123 said:
:Why is nobody asking him to prove that he never originally agreed to lower the charge.
Click to expand...

How can he prove he didn't do something? Again, it's you that made that particular accusation, so the burden of proof is on you.

murdoch123 said:
Why do i have to post all this evidence, why i am in the dock guilty as charged while he gets to make an accusation and not have to prove anything.
Click to expand...

The only accusation he has made is that you filed a PayPal beef, which you have admitted to.

murdoch123 said:
don't worry i will close the door on my way out.
Click to expand...

EMOTICON-Clap.gif
 
I thought that since i was still a member i would make one final post to give you that piece of evidence you so desire.

here is a piece of evidence for you:

Everyone knows Oppressor sold me the Busse Artic as a prototype.

But it is not a prototype no matter how rare it may be so that lets me legally forfeit the sale, no ifs, no buts and until he can prove to me that it is a prototype then i am legally entitled to make a claim for my money since he refused to give me my money back.

The same goes for the Chris Reeve knife, now i know you dont believe me about the Chris Reeve, but i dont care i have the evidence for the people who need to know.

And yet again that lets me forfeit the sale before we even talk about shipping.
 
So where is the evidence? Where did he refuse to give you your money back? Lets not get into legalities with your request on lying on Federal Documents.
 
murdoch123 said:
I thought that since i was still a member i would make one final post to give you that piece of evidence you so desire.

here is a piece of evidence for you:

Everyone knows Oppressor sold me the Busse Artic as a prototype.

But it is not a prototype no matter how rare it may be so that lets me legally forfeit the sale, no ifs, no buts and until he can prove to me that it is a prototype then i am legally entitled to make a claim for my money since he refused to give me my money back.

The same goes for the Chris Reeve knife, now i know you dont believe me about the Chris Reeve, but i dont care i have the evidence for the people who need to know.

And yet again that lets me forfeit the sale before we even talk about shipping.
Click to expand...

Could someone please tell me the number of the post (and which of these 2 threads the post is on) where it was determined that this Busse Arctic One isn't a prototype??? I keep looking and I must be blind, tired... something, LOL 'cause I can't seem to find it and wanted to read this post. TIA. :)
 
One lesson that hasn't been pointed out is to do your homework, especially if purchasing limited or otherwise special items. Some info on the Arctic one:

See post 14:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=451295&highlight=Artic

See "Artic 1 Proto" as posted by Jerry Busse:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=325111&highlight=Arctic

In my humble opinion, the unusual serrations on the Arctic One in this transaction could make it a bona fide prototype - in that the shop was trying out something new. However, knowing the Busse shop, I would not consider all unique or extremely rare patterns to be "Prototypes". My standard would be Jerry identifying it as a prototype. That doesn't make it any less valuable - it's still a pretty cool Busse variant - and someone else might consider it a true prototype.

It sounds like there was a miscommunication or misunderstanding about the identity of both knives. It could be an innocent mistake, with De Oppresso selling them as they had been represented to him. Even Chris Reeve (in his email posted by murdoch) seemed to imply that there had been confusion about the Green Beret Knife, since they've changed their engraving policies.

If that's true, an honest mistake was complicated with quite a few other incidents and dramatic responses. I hope both of you get your money or goods back, without too much more pain. If it goes to the courts, the only people coming out ahead will be the lawyers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top