Badguy Alert Moparcrazy

plumcrazy 101 said
I will agree that for Superdart340 the law is probably won't be on his side this time but that doesn't absolve Moparcrazy of his actions in selling a compromised manifold without proper disclosure.
As for Superdart340, it appears that from photograhic evidence that the manifold was "out of the box" long before he had indicated and he should have been aware of the condition of the manifold. I for one cannot believe that Superdart340 cannot determine or know the condition of an manifold with all the experience this member has in selling many parts.
For a resolve,
Moparcrazy should refund Superdart340 money.
Superdart340 should admit he was less that candid with the members of this
board and apologize for his actions.

Al

OneOfMany said
Sorry plumcrazy, have to disagree on this one. Ignorance on the part of the buyer (if that is the case) does not warrant obligation on the seller to reopen the transaction.

However, if the buyer responded in a reasonable timeframe, than the seller should be obligated to refund purchase price, and if he/she were conscientious, the shipping.

It is possible that the seller was not aware that the defect was more than cosmetic either. Do they then have the right to claim refund from whom they purchased it from?

Grant

As stated in my original post, the law wouldn't support Superdart but that doesn't absolve Moparcrazy of selling compromised parts from a moral or ethical standpoint.

Moparcrazy is a seasoned seller and I for one do not believe for one second that Moparcrazy didn't know the condition of the manifold, hence no photographs of the intake ports or a disclosure of the true condition of the intake.

Moparcrazy deliberately, in my opinion, deceived the buyer and should refund Superdart340 his money based solely on moral and ethical conduct, perception by fellow members of this board and his consicience