In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options

GunBroker rifle sale question 2

He DogHe Dog Member Posts: 51,063 ✭✭✭✭
edited January 2015 in Ask the Experts
In your listing you disclosed (trigger job) or showed (after market recoil pad) the alterations you made, except the re-crown. In my view the buyer has a legitimate reason to return the rifle. Perhaps with some test shooting a compromise could be reached.

Comments

  • Options
    duckhunterduckhunter Member Posts: 7,686 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
  • Options
    bpostbpost Member Posts: 32,664 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I see it as probable buyers remorse, it was sold "AS IS". There is nothing wrong with a re-crown on a rifle. I agree it could have been better pictured and described. However, it is up to the buyer to make sure he knows what he is bidding on. Ask questions and ask for additional pictures if needed BEFORE BIDDING.

    At some point buyers need to be held accountable for bidding on items. That is the purpose of listing it "AS IS" all sales final. You are getting what you are bidding on, and if you win it is YOURS to keep, so bid accordingly.

    EDIT

    Implied Warranty of Merchantability

    Implied warranties come in two general types: merchantability and fitness. An implied warranty of merchantability is an unwritten and unspoken guarantee to the buyer that goods purchased conform to ordinary standards of care and that they are of the same average grade, quality, and value as similar goods sold under similar circumstances. In other words, merchantable goods are goods fit for the ordinary purposes for which they are to be used. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), adopted by most states, provides that courts may imply a Warranty of merchantability when (1) the seller is the merchant of such goods, and (2) the buyer uses the goods for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are sold (? 2-314). Thus, a buyer can sue a seller for breaching the implied warranty by selling goods unfit for their ordinary purpose.

    There is rarely any question as to whether the seller is the merchant of the goods sold. Nevertheless, in Huprich v. Bitto, 667 So.2d 685 (Ala. 1995), a farmer who sold defective horse feed was found not to be a merchant of horse feed. The court stated that the farmer did not hold himself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to the sale of corn as horse feed, and therefore was not a merchant of horse feed for purposes of determining a breach of implied warranty of merchantability.

    The question of whether goods are fit for their ordinary purpose is much more frequently litigated. Thomas Coffer sued the manufacturer of a jar of mixed nuts after he bit down on an unshelled filbert, believing it to have been shelled, and damaged a tooth. Coffer argued in part that the presence of the unshelled nut among shelled nuts was a breach of the implied warranty of merchantability. Unquestionably, Coffer was using the nuts for their ordinary purpose when he ate them, and unquestionably, he suffered a dental injury when he bit the filbert's hard shell. But the North Carolina appellate court held that the jar of mixed nuts was nonetheless fit for the ordinary purpose for which jars of mixed nuts are used (Coffer v. Standard Brands, 30 N.C. App. 134, 226 S.E.2d 534 [1976]). The court consulted the state agriculture board's regulations and noted that the peanut industry allows a small amount of unshelled nuts to be included with shelled nuts without rendering the shelled nuts inedible or adulterated. The court also noted that shells are a natural incident to nuts.

    The policy behind the implied warranty of merchantability is basic: sellers are generally better suited than buyers to determine whether a product will perform properly. Holding the seller liable for a product that is not fit for its ordinary purpose shifts the costs of nonperformance from the buyer to the seller. This motivates the seller to ensure the product's proper performance before placing it on the market. The seller is better able to absorb the costs of a product's nonperformance, usually by spreading the risk to consumers in the form of increased prices.

    Not sure a re-crown has any impact upon the usability of the rifle. I too look forward to seeing how this gets resolved. It seems a number of satisfactory remedies are available to the seller short of getting the rifle back.
  • Options
    MaaloxMaalox Member Posts: 5,160 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I think he has a case. You discuss the other modifications but not the re-crown. You also don't show a close up of the barrel so how could he know this work was done.

    With all that said, I would try to work a deal with him to keep it. Maybe offer to pay for another re-crown if he is concerned with the condition of the current work. There were many modification described so he should not have been expecting a brand new rifle.
    Regards, MAALOX
  • Options
    Mark GMark G Member Posts: 1,663 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Not sure if it was intentional but you only have one photo that shows the end of the barrel and that is from an angle facing away from the crown. If you had a straight on shot of the end of the crown it probably wouldn't be as big of an issue, even if you didn't mention it. Did you shoot the rifle after the recrown and if so how did it shoot?
    Back to the original question, As Is -No Returns means just that. Don't be surprised if he leaves negative feedback about undeclared alterations. Have him shoot it. It might become a non-issue. Personally, I would take it back as it was an oversight on my part.
  • Options
    nmyersnmyers Member Posts: 16,881 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Well, now the OP has changed his original posting to: "I put a 90 degree crown put on them muzzle". That doesn't make any sense to me, so I really have no idea what he did to the rifle. I don't even know what a "90 degree crown" is; is he saying it was counterbored? Was it done professionally & the barrel reblued, or did he do it freehand with a drill in the basement & leave a ragged area of bare metal? I don't think we should have to guess.

    "As is - no returns" does not necessarily mean what it says. Every state in the union has laws on "implied merchantability"; this usually means that any item sold must be suitable for the purpose for which it was intended, or the buyer is entitled to a full refund, regardless of any disclaimer. This may or may not apply to the rifle we are discussing.

    I'll be disappointed if the OP doesn't get back to us & tell us how he worked it out.

    Neal
  • Options
    4Huntin4Huntin Member Posts: 119 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    When I see no return.
    I move on.
  • Options
    GrasshopperGrasshopper Member Posts: 16,809 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I make sure the feedabck is good first, and when I sell some of my own firearms,,I really try not to deceive anyone about anything of that item...it just works out better that way,,,and imo,,although as-is,,,why didn't the seller state that,,shady, and not what GunBroker needs for its rep. Been here almost 12 years and buying and selling,,have run into a few sellers that didn't state some flaws,,on my never ever bid list again.
  • Options
    competentonecompetentone Member Posts: 4,698 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by nmyers
    Well, now the OP has changed his original posting to: "I put a 90 degree crown put on them muzzle". That doesn't make any sense to me, so I really have no idea what he did to the rifle. I don't even know what a "90 degree crown" is; is he saying it was counterbored? Was it done professionally & the barrel reblued, or did he do it freehand with a drill in the basement & leave a ragged area of bare metal? I don't think we should have to guess.

    "As is - no returns" does not necessarily mean what it says. Every state in the union has laws on "implied merchantability"; this usually means that any item sold must be suitable for the purpose for which it was intended, or the buyer is entitled to a full refund, regardless of any disclaimer. This may or may not apply to the rifle we are discussing.

    I'll be disappointed if the OP doesn't get back to us & tell us how he worked it out.

    Neal


    I agree with that. I see the listing now (from the link posted in the other thread). I see the seller's description includes: "I fixed it up for my granddaughter..." To me, that says it's been "worked over" even if he specifically didn't disclose the recrown.

    As Neal says above, though, if the recrown is some monstrosity that makes the rifle effectively not useable, I think a return is due. If the recrown is professionally done and does not affect the rifle's performance, then I'd say: no return is due (even though it would have been nice to disclose it specifically like the other work, that had been done on the rifle, was disclosed.)

    As a learning lesson in this case: a few seconds to take and post a picture of the muzzle end, when doing the listing, would have avoided this problem now. The old: "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

    If you show all the details of an item when selling something "as is" there is no doubt about what the buyer is buying. Take a look at my listings (which I do "as is") if you want to see examples of how to show all the details, with photos, of an item you're selling: http://www.GunBroker.com/All/BI.aspx?IncludeSellers=147464
  • Options
    toad67toad67 Member Posts: 13,019 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The buyer should be stuck with it and the seller should have expected some problems. First of all, IMO it's a lame auction and the seller did a poor job. All the pics of the gun, other than a couple of the pad are the middle side of the gun. The description sucks about the condition of the gun itself, and the seller should have asked a few questions. I don't want to know why you butchered the gun, but what cuts of meat are left on it. Personally w/o even a few words describing the condition I would have never even bid w/o contacting the seller. JMHO.

    Todd
  • Options
    rsnyder55rsnyder55 Member Posts: 2,526 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Crowning the barrel is not something one usually expects done and should have been mentioned. It is not just a replacement or tuning of a part, it is a machining process. In many cases it is a desired option that would attract buyers and should have been listed as a feature with a picture.

    Not being imformed of this and not seeing the quality of the work prior to purchase was an omission.

    Then again, He may just have buyers remorse as stated earlier and is looking for an excuse to back out.

    I would probably take it back if he paid shipping to return it.
Sign In or Register to comment.