E-BAY Super-8 Transaction Gone Sour...

[Alex]

Well yeah, if a thief steals $200 bucks from you and offers you $80 bucks back for cab fare I guess that's pretty generous, for a thief.

If the seller had been completely honest in reporting the condition of the camera when it was being auctioned, the camera would have sold for under $50.00.

I offered the seller $100.00, or MORE than what I had paid in previous auctions for the exact same camera, and those worked!

The final auction price was around $260.00 to 280.00 dollars (I forget now as it's been quite a while since this all happened).

Since the cameras NEVER sold for more than $107.00 dollars in the past, and that camera actually worked, how does keeping $200.00 dollars for a broken camera that was ADVERTISED on the auction as being in good working condition a fair offer?

Yes, I could have gotten my money back, but then the thief would have just fenced the camera to someone else who probably would not understand the camera's shortcomings because it is a complex camera to use. So I guess as long as I don't get screwed I should let the thief walk away and screw someone else over. That's not my style.

The real solution would have been for ebay to refund me money, not all of the money, but money based on their insurance policy for non working gear. But because I caught the thief picking my pocket, he was willing to put the money back into my pocket that he had stolen and call it a "square deal". That was good enough for Ebay (which makes Ebay an accessory to fraud) and they would not use insurance money set aside specifically for situations such as mine.

[Alex]

Originally posted by octopus1:

Return the Camera and look for something along the same line. 20+ year old technology = inoperable more often than not.

<font size="2" face="verdana, sans-serif">The cameras do not come up that often on ebay.

[octopus1]

What are you looking for?

[Alex]

Great Question.

I think Ebay is protecting misleading descriptions in their auctions and I'd like to see a few "safeguards" in place for the buyers.

I agree that it would be impossible for Ebay to not be able to stop misleading descriptions, but I don't think the seller should retain all the rights and the buyer have none once it is documented the item was not as described by the seller.

As it stands now, the seller continues to have all the rights as before the transgression, and in the process this limits the rights of the buyer.

[Alex]

Great Question.

I think Ebay is protecting misleading descriptions in their auctions and I'd like to see a few "safeguards" in place for the buyers.

I agree that it would be impossible for Ebay to not be able to stop misleading descriptions, but I don't think the seller should retain all the rights and the buyer have none once it is documented the item was not as described by the seller.

As it stands now, the seller, upon being "caught" by the buyer having misrepresented the condition of the item, continues to have all the same rights they had during the during auction, and in the process this limits the rights of the buyer.

If a thief reaches into your pocket and you catch them, should the thief be the one that dictates the solution? That's the system that Ebay presently uses. [img]graemlins/thumbs_down.gif[/img]

[octopus1]

Well it is an exorbant amount to be paying for a camera produced in 1976-1978. 800 series I suppose...the last one I scoped came from the land of down under... [img]smile.gif[/img] Was that you?

Know of anyone who can fix a Nikon R8?

[Alex]

Maybe U.T. Photo in Burbank, California.

It's really a shame that in this day and age of the internet there is no real network of Super-8 camera repair facilities, and yet, anytime a new super-8 camera is discussed, the idea gets supplanted by making a new 16mm camera instead.

I don't recall the Eumig camera from Australia that you speak of. I did bid on an underwater camera recently, but I no longer bid to win, I may bid just in case I can get a really good deal
on a camera I don't already have.