Literal forum of public opinion- Damaged goods sold to me from 6MT

[HEWSINATOR]

Firstly, this was 6MTs idea to post and see what people think. We are obviously not seeing eye to eye and he wanted to see what you all thought. There are countless PMs so I will try to give the Coles's notes. 6MT, obviously feel free to respond with facts, as I am going to relay this with them only.

Original FS Thread: http://www.superfuture.com/city/supertalk/showthread.php?t=13780&highlight=1966+Canes

-I bought a pair of 1966 Unwashed, New with tags Canes, for $140, plus 20 shipping. Good deal, yes, or so it would seem. After telling 6MT that I would pay the day before he was ready to ship, I paypaled him the money, and he was supposed to ship on the 7th, I payed on the 6th. I did not get tracking and was told that the goods were sent, and the tracking was left at his office. The goods were not shipped untill the 8th, whatever.

-I recieved the jeans yesterday, and in my excitement I soaked them. Maybe I made a mistake here. But in the process of soaking the jeans, I noticed a red hang tag on them in the middle of the leg, on the back. Upon further inspection, this was clearly there to indicate a flaw in the denim (pic to follow). Though a somewhat minor flaw, it is a flaw nonetheless, leading me to believe that these are factory seconds.

-6MT thinks that since I soaked them, this is like driving a car off the dealers lot, using it, and then trying to return it. The value is now reduced. I agree, however, I believe the "dealer" has an obligation, and ought to act in good faith and make good on the sale. Especially for something that was indisputably always there.

-My ultimate settlement would obviously be a full refund including shipping at least one way. 6MT has not proposed a solution. I have no interest in flawed jeans, and if I had known they were, I never would have started the transaction.

Pics:

http://www.2and2.net/Uploads/Images/IMG_1220.JPG

http://www.2and2.net/Uploads/Images/IMG_1213.JPG

Others have got thier jeans from 6MT, and for that reason, I do not think that this was in bad faith. 6MT says he never saw the damage. This is entirely possible. Hence me not seeing it until I soaked them. I think that if he did not see it shipping, it is fair for me not to have seen soaking.

Thanks for the help....and sorry for the ginourmous pics, but I need the detail.

[HEWSINATOR]

Firstly, this was 6MTs idea to post and see what people think. We are obviously not seeing eye to eye and he wanted to see what you all thought. There are countless PMs so I will try to give the Coles's notes. 6MT, obviously feel free to respond with facts, as I am going to relay this with them only.

Original FS Thread: http://www.superfuture.com/city/supertalk/showthread.php?t=13780&highlight=1966+Canes

-I bought a pair of 1966 Unwashed, New with tags Canes, for $140, plus 20 shipping. Good deal, yes, or so it would seem. After telling 6MT that I would pay the day before he was ready to ship, I paypaled him the money, and he was supposed to ship on the 7th, I payed on the 6th. I did not get tracking and was told that the goods were sent, and the tracking was left at his office. The goods were not shipped untill the 8th, whatever.

-I recieved the jeans yesterday, and in my excitement I soaked them. Maybe I made a mistake here. But in the process of soaking the jeans, I noticed a red hang tag on them in the middle of the leg, on the back. Upon further inspection, this was clearly there to indicate a flaw in the denim (pic to follow). Though a somewhat minor flaw, it is a flaw nonetheless, leading me to believe that these are factory seconds.

-6MT thinks that since I soaked them, this is like driving a car off the dealers lot, using it, and then trying to return it. The value is now reduced. I agree, however, I believe the "dealer" has an obligation, and ought to act in good faith and make good on the sale. Especially for something that was indisputably always there.

-My ultimate settlement would obviously be a full refund including shipping at least one way. 6MT has not proposed a solution. I have no interest in flawed jeans, and if I had known they were, I never would have started the transaction.

Pics:

http://www.2and2.net/Uploads/Images/IMG_1220.JPG

http://www.2and2.net/Uploads/Images/IMG_1213.JPG

Others have got thier jeans from 6MT, and for that reason, I do not think that this was in bad faith. 6MT says he never saw the damage. This is entirely possible. Hence me not seeing it until I soaked them. I think that if he did not see it shipping, it is fair for me not to have seen soaking.

Thanks for the help....and sorry for the ginourmous pics, but I need the detail.

[snugglepony]

that's rough...

if you'd paid a lower price (isn't 160 shipped kinda high? especially considering all the wisdom in the "buying jeans from japan" thread?) i'd say fuck it. i think that if you take those to a tailor and have them do an RPM-style repair over the top (wouldn't even need a patch on the inside), that it would look really cool. that said, you thought you were buying first quality NWT jeans, and you got (obviously) seconds.

maybe 6MT can get a new pair on your behalf? where did he purchase them from?

good luck to both of you.

[snugglepony]

that's rough...

if you'd paid a lower price (isn't 160 shipped kinda high? especially considering all the wisdom in the "buying jeans from japan" thread?) i'd say fuck it. i think that if you take those to a tailor and have them do an RPM-style repair over the top (wouldn't even need a patch on the inside), that it would look really cool. that said, you thought you were buying first quality NWT jeans, and you got (obviously) seconds.

maybe 6MT can get a new pair on your behalf? where did he purchase them from?

good luck to both of you.

[englandmj7]

I trust that 6MT would not have purposely sold you faulty goods as I have spoken with him several times/done a deal with him before and he seems to be very honest/trustworthy. Therefore, I think that as he was doing you a favor selling you the jeans at a good price and that because he is not a storefront or some licensed denim dealer, he has no obligation to have sent the jeans with any kind of warranty, etc. other than the fact that they were in good condition, unwashed, and undamaged to the casual viewer. If you had not soaked them, I trust that he would have been kind enough to have refunded you, but in all honesty, it seems like a shitty situation..... I would not side with you in regards to your recommendation that he should refund you. You really have severely "tainted" the jeans in that there is no way he will be able to resell them for close to that price now that they have been rinsed.......

:confused:

[englandmj7]

I trust that 6MT would not have purposely sold you faulty goods as I have spoken with him several times/done a deal with him before and he seems to be very honest/trustworthy. Therefore, I think that as he was doing you a favor selling you the jeans at a good price and that because he is not a storefront or some licensed denim dealer, he has no obligation to have sent the jeans with any kind of warranty, etc. other than the fact that they were in good condition, unwashed, and undamaged to the casual viewer. If you had not soaked them, I trust that he would have been kind enough to have refunded you, but in all honesty, it seems like a shitty situation..... I would not side with you in regards to your recommendation that he should refund you. You really have severely "tainted" the jeans in that there is no way he will be able to resell them for close to that price now that they have been rinsed.......

:confused:

[chim]

You could have returned it, but you soaked it. I'm going to side with 6MT on this one, it looked like an honest mistake, and honestly that repair job is going to look pretty cool once it starts fading. It looks like a really small nick anyway (thats perfectly repaired), if 6MT wants to be a nice guy he could discount your purchase by a couple bucks. 160 for canes is pretty cheap as it is right?

[chim]

You could have returned it, but you soaked it. I'm going to side with 6MT on this one, it looked like an honest mistake, and honestly that repair job is going to look pretty cool once it starts fading. It looks like a really small nick anyway (thats perfectly repaired), if 6MT wants to be a nice guy he could discount your purchase by a couple bucks. 160 for canes is pretty cheap as it is right?

[denimdestroyedmylife]

wabi sabi?--------bad joke, sorry. (tough crowd)

in all seriousness, you presented a well-articulated, well-documented case. the bottom line is that you did not get the goods that you paid for: new, unflawed, jeans. those jeans would not be put on a sales floor. the fact that you soaked them has nothing to do with anything------they are damaged goods; sending them back with the tags intact would allow them to be pawned off on someone else. i propose that 6MT do the right thing and give your money back. it is on him to sort this out with his supplier.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

wabi sabi?--------bad joke, sorry. (tough crowd)

in all seriousness, you presented a well-articulated, well-documented case. the bottom line is that you did not get the goods that you paid for: new, unflawed, jeans. those jeans would not be put on a sales floor. the fact that you soaked them has nothing to do with anything------they are damaged goods; sending them back with the tags intact would allow them to be pawned off on someone else. i propose that 6MT do the right thing and give your money back. it is on him to sort this out with his supplier.

[HEWSINATOR]

Thanks DDML, that is exactly how I feel. It should not matter if I payed 10 dollars for them. I decided the value they were to me based on the information given to me. England, I agree, I do not believe this is intentional, as he overlooked it in packing, so I think it is fair for me to have overlooked it in soaking. Lesson learned regardless, but I think there is a moral element here, besides what they can now be sold for, that is mute in my books. Good faith is what makes this section of the forum work, and if you want to sell your stuff, especially in quantity like 6MT did, I think you take on some responsibility of a store, unlike somebody selling their year old jeans. As I said, a full refund would not be the only thing I wuld settle for, but is my starting point, 6MT will not make an offer. I feel this is HIS problem to remedy FOR ME. Not mine for me.

[HEWSINATOR]

Thanks DDML, that is exactly how I feel. It should not matter if I payed 10 dollars for them. I decided the value they were to me based on the information given to me. England, I agree, I do not believe this is intentional, as he overlooked it in packing, so I think it is fair for me to have overlooked it in soaking. Lesson learned regardless, but I think there is a moral element here, besides what they can now be sold for, that is mute in my books. Good faith is what makes this section of the forum work, and if you want to sell your stuff, especially in quantity like 6MT did, I think you take on some responsibility of a store, unlike somebody selling their year old jeans. As I said, a full refund would not be the only thing I wuld settle for, but is my starting point, 6MT will not make an offer. I feel this is HIS problem to remedy FOR ME. Not mine for me.

[sybaritical]

I concur, this is tough.

In the long run I don't think tiny flaws matter, but short term I'd be totally out of joint if they showed up as seconds when I'd paid full whack and my interest in keeping the piece would be minimal. That said, after buying through a middleman, you can't expect much now you've rinsed them. However, if 6MT was shifting a single pair of 66's I'm really surprised he didn't notice the hang tag. I guess a lot depends on where he picked them up from?

[sybaritical]

I concur, this is tough.

In the long run I don't think tiny flaws matter, but short term I'd be totally out of joint if they showed up as seconds when I'd paid full whack and my interest in keeping the piece would be minimal. That said, after buying through a middleman, you can't expect much now you've rinsed them. However, if 6MT was shifting a single pair of 66's I'm really surprised he didn't notice the hang tag. I guess a lot depends on where he picked them up from?

[denimdestroyedmylife]

can you change the pics to links?

i am interested in this thread for some reason, but it keeps crashing my browser...

curious to hear 6MT's take

[denimdestroyedmylife]

can you change the pics to links?

i am interested in this thread for some reason, but it keeps crashing my browser...

curious to hear 6MT's take

[keri]

Yes the jeans are flawed, and yes something like that is VERY easy to miss. I bought a pair of seconds with a much larger version of that ON MY ASS and did not notice where the damage was, even with a sticker, for a month. That damage is what I would consider unnoticeable and can be fixed witha minor reweaving in that area (www.denimtherapy.com) IMO, a much better soloution would be for 6MT to arrange to pay for this fix, or to give you a partial refund, because you did soak before inspecting, and that did lower the value of the jeans. You should have checked first, no matter trust or not, we all have absent moments.

[keri]

Yes the jeans are flawed, and yes something like that is VERY easy to miss. I bought a pair of seconds with a much larger version of that ON MY ASS and did not notice where the damage was, even with a sticker, for a month. That damage is what I would consider unnoticeable and can be fixed witha minor reweaving in that area (www.denimtherapy.com) IMO, a much better soloution would be for 6MT to arrange to pay for this fix, or to give you a partial refund, because you did soak before inspecting, and that did lower the value of the jeans. You should have checked first, no matter trust or not, we all have absent moments.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

keri, how was your situation resolved? did you know they were seconds?

[denimdestroyedmylife]

keri, how was your situation resolved? did you know they were seconds?

[yawn]

wabi sabi?--------bad joke, sorry. (tough crowd)

in all seriousness, you presented a well-articulated, well-documented case. the bottom line is that you did not get the goods that you paid for: new, unflawed, jeans. those jeans would not be put on a sales floor. the fact that you soaked them has nothing to do with anything------they are damaged goods; sending them back with the tags intact would allow them to be pawned off on someone else. i propose that 6MT do the right thing and give your money back. it is on him to sort this out with his supplier.

ddml is right.

[yawn]

wabi sabi?--------bad joke, sorry. (tough crowd)

in all seriousness, you presented a well-articulated, well-documented case. the bottom line is that you did not get the goods that you paid for: new, unflawed, jeans. those jeans would not be put on a sales floor. the fact that you soaked them has nothing to do with anything------they are damaged goods; sending them back with the tags intact would allow them to be pawned off on someone else. i propose that 6MT do the right thing and give your money back. it is on him to sort this out with his supplier.

ddml is right.

[cultpop 0217]

if you absolutely do not want the jeans because of that flaw he should exchange/return them but keep a 15%-25% "restocking/you shrunk these jeans" fee. you did lower the value by soaking them.

if you are willing to keep the jeans ( i would, that kind of damage could happen within minutes of wearing them) he should give you a discount. im not sure how much but you did get quite a deal in the first place (those retail for close to $300 at hist. pres.) and i think the flaw is obviously so minor that neither of you saw it at first.

if he allowed you to return them he could easily resell them despite the flaw and shrinkage issues for close to what you paid. or he could take it up with his supplier depending on how he got them. having said that by soaking them you did take some degree of ownership so you should not get a full refund.

its a tough call but i would say it would be in his best interest as a seller to refund you most of your money. and next time examine your expensive japanese repros more carefully before you put them in water! i really dont understand how that red thingy escaped your attention in the first place.

edit: where exactly on the leg is that flaw?

[cultpop 0217]

if you absolutely do not want the jeans because of that flaw he should exchange/return them but keep a 15%-25% "restocking/you shrunk these jeans" fee. you did lower the value by soaking them.

if you are willing to keep the jeans ( i would, that kind of damage could happen within minutes of wearing them) he should give you a discount. im not sure how much but you did get quite a deal in the first place (those retail for close to $300 at hist. pres.) and i think the flaw is obviously so minor that neither of you saw it at first.

if he allowed you to return them he could easily resell them despite the flaw and shrinkage issues for close to what you paid. or he could take it up with his supplier depending on how he got them. having said that by soaking them you did take some degree of ownership so you should not get a full refund.

its a tough call but i would say it would be in his best interest as a seller to refund you most of your money. and next time examine your expensive japanese repros more carefully before you put them in water! i really dont understand how that red thingy escaped your attention in the first place.

edit: where exactly on the leg is that flaw?

[onemancult]

Find out how much these would cost to be repaired;

you should receive a refund for that amount. Not saying

that you actually should get them repaired, but I am operating

under the assumption that these jeans would've sold at less

than what you paid for them had he seen the damage...

and they would have been advertised as damaged.

I think rather than coming up with some arbitrary amount for

you to get back, it should be set at whatever price quote you

can get for repairing the denim.

[onemancult]

Find out how much these would cost to be repaired;

you should receive a refund for that amount. Not saying

that you actually should get them repaired, but I am operating

under the assumption that these jeans would've sold at less

than what you paid for them had he seen the damage...

and they would have been advertised as damaged.

I think rather than coming up with some arbitrary amount for

you to get back, it should be set at whatever price quote you

can get for repairing the denim.

[HEWSINATOR]

Cult pop, The flaw is behind the knee. On the same token should 6MT not have inspected the goods before he shipped? If the flaw was so easy to miss in packaging, is it not fair to have missed before soaking. Is the value that reduced by making them one wash? I still have tags, if this matters. Does the damage effect me that much, probably not, assuming it does not get worse, BUT, I never would have bought them if this was the case.

Would you guys be ok if this happend to you from a store? Should it be different from private sellers in our community. These are serious questions.

As for the restocking fee. That is a little silly IMO, because then 6MT has jeans very similar to the ones he sold me under false pretences (albeit possibly innocent, even though he showed a propensity to lie as per the date mailed), and I would pay for nothing.

[HEWSINATOR]

Cult pop, The flaw is behind the knee. On the same token should 6MT not have inspected the goods before he shipped? If the flaw was so easy to miss in packaging, is it not fair to have missed before soaking. Is the value that reduced by making them one wash? I still have tags, if this matters. Does the damage effect me that much, probably not, assuming it does not get worse, BUT, I never would have bought them if this was the case.

Would you guys be ok if this happend to you from a store? Should it be different from private sellers in our community. These are serious questions.

As for the restocking fee. That is a little silly IMO, because then 6MT has jeans very similar to the ones he sold me under false pretences (albeit possibly innocent, even though he showed a propensity to lie as per the date mailed), and I would pay for nothing.

[Servo2000]

I would argue that there has been a long-standing difference between private sellers and "big" companies. For instance, if you look at eBay most sellers mention asking any questions / for photos ahead of time.

In my opinion, this is the internet version of inspecting an item in a vintage store or at a garage sale. These people can't reasonably be expected to make any money with people making returns for little things they failed to notice on what are, admittedly, possibly second hand goods.

This is a particularly tough issue, but I think you may have trouble as IMO 6MT has a reasonable case to present that he should not have to make a refund. In a sense, because of your having used it, you've set yourself up in a stalemate where both arguments are legitimate enough that really nothing can be done.

His reputation as a seller is hardly at a risk as other people have gotten their goods fine and most people seem to think that they would not mind this mistake, so I supppose that's on his head.

Anyway, my two cents that I could remember to type. I'm not going to proof-read this thing as I have to go so go easy on anything I left out stupidly, hopefully you'll get the gist of it however.

[Servo2000]

I would argue that there has been a long-standing difference between private sellers and "big" companies. For instance, if you look at eBay most sellers mention asking any questions / for photos ahead of time.

In my opinion, this is the internet version of inspecting an item in a vintage store or at a garage sale. These people can't reasonably be expected to make any money with people making returns for little things they failed to notice on what are, admittedly, possibly second hand goods.

This is a particularly tough issue, but I think you may have trouble as IMO 6MT has a reasonable case to present that he should not have to make a refund. In a sense, because of your having used it, you've set yourself up in a stalemate where both arguments are legitimate enough that really nothing can be done.

His reputation as a seller is hardly at a risk as other people have gotten their goods fine and most people seem to think that they would not mind this mistake, so I supppose that's on his head.

Anyway, my two cents that I could remember to type. I'm not going to proof-read this thing as I have to go so go easy on anything I left out stupidly, hopefully you'll get the gist of it however.