Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

eBay con (and reticle eyepiece).

acey

By acey
in The Astro Lounge

Recommended Posts

Ant

Ant

Posted
Posted

Personally I agree totally misleading.

If the auction is for a catalogue then the image should be a catalogue, the title should be "Catalogue For Sale".

I have no issue with them listing stuff in the body of the listing detailing what's going to be in the catalogue...

IMO if you have an auction that says 1.15" recticle EP and shows a picture of the same - then that what the auction should be for!

Ant

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

I agree that this approach is misleading which is a shame because this seller is a good guy and has provided excellent service when I have dealt with him in the past.

I don't think he would intentionally mislead potential customers - I guess his enthusiasm for this novel approach has got the better of him.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SteelRat

SteelRat

Posted
Posted

His first 6 items are all just the O.E. catalogue download, so's the tent further down. If you haven't seen the AltAz listing first it's a bit of a shocker - senior moment?

Not everyone does nowadays, but as long as the bidders have read the listings properly...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beamer3.6m

beamer3.6m

Posted
Posted

Interesting legal position this one:

This is a sale by description but what carries more weight, the image or the written blurb.

I would assume the written blurb as regularly people will list an item, such as a telescope, with a picture from another website.

Technically this would mean that the image shows a new scope and the description says used.

However, if you bought a car which had a picture of it being silver and then when you bought it it was blue could you claim not by discription - I assume it would depend if the blurb was silent on the issue of colour.

Hmmm, its a puzzler - would not want to run it anywhere near Court though. I think this is a very important lesson in reading the advert fully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Warthog

The Warthog

Posted
Posted

As I read this, you are bidding on a genuine reticle eyepiece. The vendor has provided information about his business and services below, and probably copied and pasted the blurb from another place where the disclaimer makes sense. I don't think you will bid on this item and receive a catalogue instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beamer3.6m

beamer3.6m

Posted
Posted

Its the catalogue:

"This listing is for the catalogue only not the item which can be found in it."

and

"

So, what do you get ? We will email you a 13 page catalogue in pdf format that you can download and browse through. We have no problem with you copying it and sharing it with your friends - in fact, we would like you too! You can also get one by just sending us your email address and we will send it out to you foc or by going here and getting it yourself!

We hope that you will enjoy this publication."

The best bit is this is just free advertising as you can get it free, as he says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jonno

jonno

Posted
Posted

He's just trying to get more exposure in eBay for keyword searches. Its fairly scummy practice but he doesn't have a buy now for £50 so its not really a straight con. Theres loads of stuff he could do to get noticed other than basically conning clicks from people - a quick search around the net would get him plenty of ways to get more traffic. You'd have thought he would realise that people in the astronomy community are probably fairly moral and would likely avoid him on principle..

I don't use ebay but someone should really report him although hopefully karma will eventually run him over!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
acey

acey

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The same seller previously listed the eyepiece itself here (maybe forgot to insert the line about "bidding is for the catalogue not the item", got a £1 bid, and cancelled it. Presumably the idea is that anyone who actually places a bid gets its cancelled, and the seller gets his free advertising space (at a cost of the bidder's wasted time and effort).

I can only assume that much the same dodgy practice is being peddled by another vendor (claiming to have a Televue APO at a giveaway price) here.

Like they say, if it looks too good to be true, it almost certainly is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
canuck

canuck

Posted
Posted

While this catalogue situation is a bit sleazy at best, the Televue listing is much more sinister. It looks like a hijacked account. You click on the e-mail, and you'll very likely have to confirm your Ebay details for 'security.' They then have access to your account details...if you're unlucky (or unwise), you take the bait further, and send the money for the scope (he has 3 of them, you know), and not only lose money, but will likely have your good identity used to try and scam someone else.

Ebay is a shark tank...but keep your eyes open, and good sense intact, and it can work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beamer3.6m

beamer3.6m

Posted
Posted

I think the Televue APO is quite tempting.

Just place a bid at the very last moment and then technically he is legally bound to supply the scope for the bid price - afterall this is an auction.

If he wants to sell it for £500.00 buy it now he should have that as an option.

The bonus would be that when he claims he does not owe you anything you could potentially bring a claim for breach of contract as a result of which he would owe you the telescope, or I think it could be argued the cost of buying another.

I think in reality it is not worth the hassle but it would be nice to screw him over.

Please don't rely on the above though if you choose to attempt this - the risk is yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
canuck

canuck

Posted
Posted

The bonus would be that when he claims he does not owe you anything you could potentially bring a claim for breach of contract as a result of which he would owe you the telescope, or I think it could be argued the cost of buying another.

I think an important fact to consider here is that as it's likely to be a hijacked Ebay account, whoever is on the other end of that Gmail address is likely to be the guilty party, and not the Ebay user who's listing the name is under. I don't think expecting a victimized ebayer to be held bound to a contract of this nature would be reasonable.

Good Luck finding Mr. Gmail, and if you do, I can't imagine he would consider anything legally binding!

Handcuffs, maybe... :angry: :nono:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Warthog

The Warthog

Posted
Posted

I have to revise my opinion. I put a £1 bid on the item, even though the free postage seemed to good to be true, and I'm old enough to know that if something appears to good to be true, it usually isn't. If I'd lost a penny or a pound, it wouldn't have bothered me. I think I could stand it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Warthog

The Warthog

Posted
Posted

And here is the text of the email that Skies Unlimited sent me:

"We note that you have placed a bid on our listing which is showing the illuminated reticle eyepiece. The listing is for the catalogue only in which the field flattener may be found. The catalogue can be freely downloaded from the listing. We are sure that you would like to cancel your bid or we could do it for you.

We apologise if we have caused you any problem. Kind regards "

Obviously boiler-plate text, but they did take measures to make sure I didn't continue my bid. Odd, this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.