From: A.Lee on
petrolcan <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <0jffc5pnuk7qis8u38e0l2tb2lvksj3efr(a)4ax.com>, Peter Parry
> says...

>
> > Spacker is clearly unhinged and beyond rational discussion but I'm a
> > bit surprised that you would think the attempted sale of a photo
> > described as a laptop for the price of a laptop and a box described
> > (several times) as a box for the price of a box are in any way
> > comparable.
>
> It has been stated before that fran and spacker have become borg, they
> are now known collectively as fracker.

Now you need the idiot Michael Adams to appear, and you'll have a full
set of twats.
Alan.
--
To reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'.
From: petrolcan on
In article <ha9lng$p95$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Observer says...
>
> "petrolcan" <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.25321a141f85375c989893(a)text.news.virginmedia.com...
> >
> > I've already stated my reasons. As I've said before please report the
> > auction.
>
> You really don't have to explain anything mate, fracker don't really mean
> what they are saying, its just another s**t-stirring attempt, showing them
> as the ridiculous pathetic pair they are.

Oh, I'm well aware of what the pair of them are attempting and it
doesn't worry me in the slightest.

> Your listing couldn't have been clearer., (unless they're as thick as 2
> short planks - ah yes, that must be it!)) It's rather sad that all they have
> to do is sit furtively seeking out people's listings just to try and score
> points - in which they failed miserably BTW

*DING*


From: petrolcan on
In article <1j7224i.d0f9ry1lonts0N%alan(a)darkroom.+.com>, A.Lee says...
>
> petrolcan <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <0jffc5pnuk7qis8u38e0l2tb2lvksj3efr(a)4ax.com>, Peter Parry
> > says...
>
> >
> > > Spacker is clearly unhinged and beyond rational discussion but I'm a
> > > bit surprised that you would think the attempted sale of a photo
> > > described as a laptop for the price of a laptop and a box described
> > > (several times) as a box for the price of a box are in any way
> > > comparable.
> >
> > It has been stated before that fran and spacker have become borg, they
> > are now known collectively as fracker.
>
> Now you need the idiot Michael Adams to appear, and you'll have a full
> set of twats.

I don't believe I've come accross him as yet although I could be wrong.
From: Fran on

"petrolcan" <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.253219dbc618bae5989892(a)text.news.virginmedia.com...
> In article <ha8e7k$ntk$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Fran says...
>>
>> "petrolcan" <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.2531cb16a38ef62f98988c(a)text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>
>>
>> In the unlikely event that someone had bid it up to the value of an
>> actual camera I would not have gone through with the sale. I don't treat
>> ebay users the way you do.
>>
>> ====
>>
>> Then you should not have taken the buyer's money.
>
> So, again, please tell me how to block a paypal payment from my account.

Just do a partial refund.


From: Fran on

"petrolcan" <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.25321ad3c756c725989895(a)text.news.virginmedia.com...
In article <ha8m0o$pls$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Fran says...
>
> "Peter Parry" <peter(a)wpp.ltd.uk> wrote in message
> news:0jffc5pnuk7qis8u38e0l2tb2lvksj3efr(a)4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 22:03:47 +0100, "Fran" <usenet1304(a)btinternet.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>"petrolcan" <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:MPG.2531cb16a38ef62f98988c(a)text.news.virginmedia.com...
> >>
> >>
> >>In the unlikely event that someone had bid it up to the value of an
> >>actual camera I would not have gone through with the sale. I don't treat
> >>ebay users the way you do.
> >>
> >>====
> >
> >>Then you should not have taken the buyer's money.
> >
> > If you know of any EOS350D going for �5.50 please let me know :-).
> >
> > Spacker is clearly unhinged and beyond rational discussion but I'm a
> > bit surprised that you would think the attempted sale of a photo
> > described as a laptop for the price of a laptop and a box described
> > (several times) as a box for the price of a box are in any way
> > comparable.
> >
>
> I did not compare those two instances, nor have I made that statement at
> all.
>
> The buyer said he made a mistake, and would allow petrolcan to keep the
> cash
> without sending the box.

Correct so far.

> I would have refunded the money even so, and asked
> the buyer to agree to file a mutual so that fees could be recouped.

What makes you think that I haven't already done so?

> Listing the box was foolish.

But you cannot explain why.

====

I explained it why it was foolish very clearly. You laid yourself open to
precisely what transpired, for one thing. You were very lucky that your
buyer did not neg you. And secondly, you sold something that could easily
have been used for fraud and is against EBay policy.

I hope you have refunded. It would be the ethical course of action.