TheJackel2013
Retro Guru
Hello All,
I sure could use some feedback from the group. I recently purchased a few parts on this board from one person: namely some rigid forks, a stem and a handlebar. When they arrived they were clearly damaged in a pre-existing way and the damage was not disclosed clearly in the For Sale post.
The Stem was described as 'Perfect', and in fact it was in very good condition, save for some surface scuffs (no deep scratches) and one letter on the large decal was slightly damaged. I don't think something like this is 'Perfect', I would have described it to be in very good condition, or even excellent condition, but not perfect. But it's not a significant irritant and I may be hung up on semantics. On the other hand, the seller asked for, and I paid top dollar for something in the perfect range. The deal for the stem I can accept.
The Handlebar was severely crimped by bar ends, not just the usual dent, but crimped into a half circle and 'w' pattern. It is on the last 3/4" and I suppose it's not structural. The handlebar was priced well, and to be completely honest I would have likely purchased it anyways, but maybe ask for a 5 GBP discount because of the damage.
The fork on the other hand had one leg which was dented. The size of the dent was easily 1" x 3" and 1/2" deep. A lot of rubber residue on top of the dent and a lot of gouges on both legs makes me believe it was likely run over by a car. To make matters worse, the dented leg was bent outwards by 3-4 mm from end to end (caused by the impact and dent). The other 'straight' leg was also damaged, the epoxy bond at the dropout had separated a tiny amount and the dropout was now lower in the leg by 2mm. But it's still stuck, so I can neither separate and reglue, nor can I hammer it back together. I wonder if the seller had tried to reglue it but failed to do it properly. Either way, the dented and bent leg makes this fork not structurally sound and not usable. I could always bend it back and pull out the dent, but I wouldn't feel safe riding this fork. To make matters worse, this fork was priced in the higher end of comparables, and identically priced to another exact same fork I bought the previous week, in good condition. So it's not like the fork was priced low to have me suspect anything.
The seller described the fork's condition as "could be refinished" and did not mention any damage to the fork. To me an item that needs to be refinished has cosmetic issues only, scratches (maybe even deep scratches) and damaged decals. This I could easily accept. But to me structural damage on a fork does not lend itself to be refinished.
I confronted the seller with my concerns and his response was that the damage to the handlebar was visible in the picture. There was only 1 group shot of the parts, and the pic was small and low res on a busy background. Now that I know the handlebar crimp is there I can see it, but I would argue that at least half of RB'ers would have missed it in the pic. The other end of the handlebar is not pictured and out of frame
The separation of the good fork leg is just visible in the same picture. Again, now that I know the separation is there, I can see it. But I would again argue that at least half of RB'ers would have missed it in the pic. More importantly, the structural dent was NOT PICTURED and away from the camera (coincidence or not?).
The Seller stated that he would have diclosed the dent damage to the fork, "Had I asked about it" !!! But that he bought it in that condition and was going to restore it but has no time. I disagree of course with how anyone could restore and use a dented and bent fork.
And here is where I can be honest and say I did not ask for more pics of the items nor did I ask for more information on the damage before I purchased the parts. On my extensive history of buying and selling on this board I have found that 99% of all sellers will disclose such major damage on the forks in the ad description. I don't think I should have to ask "hey, is there any hidden structural damage on your FS item, that I can't see?" when the damage is so major that the seller should disclose it. I mean what's next? "has your item been stored near a radioactive waste dump and will I get radiation poisoning?"
To give the seller credit, he has offered to remedy the situation but I do not know what amount is fair to ask for. The amount I will ask for as credit will be based largely on what you all think. If the fork costs 135 GBP, how much should I ask for as credit. At this point only the crown is usable, and replacement legs are unobtainable. So it's pretty much useless unless I want to hack up another set of these rare forks (which I don't) I'm thinking of asking for at least half of the 135 GBP and 5 GBP credit on the handlebar. What does everyone think?
Was the seller shady or should I have done more due diligence and thus am the author of my own misfortune?
On a side note, he also sold a very expensive frame here at the same time but did point of a much smaller 1/4" ding in the down tube in that ad description. So why be forthright in that ad, but not mine?
I have not decided to link the FS post or to his 1 single FS pic, to protect his identity in the event we can come to some agreement
UPADTED and PICs on page 2
I sure could use some feedback from the group. I recently purchased a few parts on this board from one person: namely some rigid forks, a stem and a handlebar. When they arrived they were clearly damaged in a pre-existing way and the damage was not disclosed clearly in the For Sale post.
The Stem was described as 'Perfect', and in fact it was in very good condition, save for some surface scuffs (no deep scratches) and one letter on the large decal was slightly damaged. I don't think something like this is 'Perfect', I would have described it to be in very good condition, or even excellent condition, but not perfect. But it's not a significant irritant and I may be hung up on semantics. On the other hand, the seller asked for, and I paid top dollar for something in the perfect range. The deal for the stem I can accept.
The Handlebar was severely crimped by bar ends, not just the usual dent, but crimped into a half circle and 'w' pattern. It is on the last 3/4" and I suppose it's not structural. The handlebar was priced well, and to be completely honest I would have likely purchased it anyways, but maybe ask for a 5 GBP discount because of the damage.
The fork on the other hand had one leg which was dented. The size of the dent was easily 1" x 3" and 1/2" deep. A lot of rubber residue on top of the dent and a lot of gouges on both legs makes me believe it was likely run over by a car. To make matters worse, the dented leg was bent outwards by 3-4 mm from end to end (caused by the impact and dent). The other 'straight' leg was also damaged, the epoxy bond at the dropout had separated a tiny amount and the dropout was now lower in the leg by 2mm. But it's still stuck, so I can neither separate and reglue, nor can I hammer it back together. I wonder if the seller had tried to reglue it but failed to do it properly. Either way, the dented and bent leg makes this fork not structurally sound and not usable. I could always bend it back and pull out the dent, but I wouldn't feel safe riding this fork. To make matters worse, this fork was priced in the higher end of comparables, and identically priced to another exact same fork I bought the previous week, in good condition. So it's not like the fork was priced low to have me suspect anything.
The seller described the fork's condition as "could be refinished" and did not mention any damage to the fork. To me an item that needs to be refinished has cosmetic issues only, scratches (maybe even deep scratches) and damaged decals. This I could easily accept. But to me structural damage on a fork does not lend itself to be refinished.
I confronted the seller with my concerns and his response was that the damage to the handlebar was visible in the picture. There was only 1 group shot of the parts, and the pic was small and low res on a busy background. Now that I know the handlebar crimp is there I can see it, but I would argue that at least half of RB'ers would have missed it in the pic. The other end of the handlebar is not pictured and out of frame
The separation of the good fork leg is just visible in the same picture. Again, now that I know the separation is there, I can see it. But I would again argue that at least half of RB'ers would have missed it in the pic. More importantly, the structural dent was NOT PICTURED and away from the camera (coincidence or not?).
The Seller stated that he would have diclosed the dent damage to the fork, "Had I asked about it" !!! But that he bought it in that condition and was going to restore it but has no time. I disagree of course with how anyone could restore and use a dented and bent fork.
And here is where I can be honest and say I did not ask for more pics of the items nor did I ask for more information on the damage before I purchased the parts. On my extensive history of buying and selling on this board I have found that 99% of all sellers will disclose such major damage on the forks in the ad description. I don't think I should have to ask "hey, is there any hidden structural damage on your FS item, that I can't see?" when the damage is so major that the seller should disclose it. I mean what's next? "has your item been stored near a radioactive waste dump and will I get radiation poisoning?"
To give the seller credit, he has offered to remedy the situation but I do not know what amount is fair to ask for. The amount I will ask for as credit will be based largely on what you all think. If the fork costs 135 GBP, how much should I ask for as credit. At this point only the crown is usable, and replacement legs are unobtainable. So it's pretty much useless unless I want to hack up another set of these rare forks (which I don't) I'm thinking of asking for at least half of the 135 GBP and 5 GBP credit on the handlebar. What does everyone think?
Was the seller shady or should I have done more due diligence and thus am the author of my own misfortune?
On a side note, he also sold a very expensive frame here at the same time but did point of a much smaller 1/4" ding in the down tube in that ad description. So why be forthright in that ad, but not mine?
I have not decided to link the FS post or to his 1 single FS pic, to protect his identity in the event we can come to some agreement
UPADTED and PICs on page 2
