Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Judge Judy skewers ebay scammer
Collapse
X
-
damn they won for 5000 bucks. as much as i can see where the defendant said it said "for photos only" and the plaintiffs fault for not fully reading, it can be misleading and I think Judge Judy was correct in her ruling.
Plus, I love Judge Judy no matter what her decision is...
Kyle1988 M3, 97 840, 99 XJ
DILLIGAF
-
That was gay. Now I know why I don't watch that show. She looked at the only evidence for less then 20 seconds.
What the seller did was fully legit. It happens every day, all day. I hate it, don't get me wrong, but until ebay creates rules against such auctions (which likely won't happen - there will always be loopholes and blurry lines), there is no legal backing like what was shown in the video.
Me and some of my friends have all been victims of "fake" auctions on ebay, but in the end, it's always been the buyer's fault for not reading and rushing into buying things.
But damn, that show is retarded.
Comment
-
Judge Judy is right. The add is very misleading and designed that way. Even though it says it is for a photo only it is not a 4.9oz photo with an audio jack that has dimensions of whatever, etc. That lady got what she deserved and I think it is awesome if she got reported to the IRS and CPS.
Also, what about lying on the feedback about fake money orders and being from Nigeria? Stupid pile of crap. She is fat and it is true, her husband is a coward. Now she has lost $5K and has to deal with the IRS and CPS becasue she wanted her 8min of fame that she has now had.sigpic
Comment
-
Well, to be honest, it looks like she put a description and specifications of the phone that she was selling a picture of, which is generally how the "scamming" works. Ebay allows this, because technically they are not scamming, the auction does state exactly what you are receiving. Morally, the seller is an asshole. Legally, she did nothing wrong.
Like I said, I hate that crap as much as everyone else, and I would be very happy if it was possible to press charges against people who do this, it would probably lower the amount of this shit on ebay.
But where do you draw the line? Aren't "electric superchargers" pushing the limits? What about the "chips" that are resistors you have to solder into your computer? Where do you draw the line, and who decides?
Comment
-
I am not a fan of JJ but in her defense I believe she looks over the "evidence" before the show. Also I believe the ad was for "what you see" (a picture) and also described the attributes of the phone. (Headphone jack, weight) etc.
[IMG]https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/my350z.com-vbulletin/550x225/80-parkerbsig_5096690e71d912ec1addc4a84e99c374685fc03 8.jpg[/IMG
Comment
-
Originally posted by JGood View PostThat was gay. Now I know why I don't watch that show. She looked at the only evidence for less then 20 seconds.
Coupled with the fact that the defendant was acting with the intent to deceive, the plaintiff could have received even a greater sum of money.
Regardless of my opinion of Judge Judy, her conformity to the law is accurate. Now if the seller had accurately described the "pictures", then there would be no case. :D
one eBay scammer down, millions to go!
Comment
-
Originally posted by nkell09 View PostShe did adequately look at the evidence. Once she found out that the "pictures" had been misrepresented as weighing 4 ounces, then she was correct in the judgement. Nothing else needed to be proven or reviewed.
Coupled with the fact that the defendant was acting with the intent to deceive, the plaintiff could have received even a greater sum of money.
Regardless of my opinion of Judge Judy, her conformity to the law is accurate. Now if the seller had accurately described the "pictures", then there would be no case. :D
one eBay scammer down, millions to go!tasty
Comment
-
The difference between intent to deceive and mis-respresentation is the fact that the defandant had scienter in regards to her actions....
We can agree to disagree. I certainly wouldn't place hard money on the courses in law that I have had. But we did address similar cases under contract law which had like rulings.Last edited by nkell09; 03-13-2007, 08:05 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by s0urce View PostTime for an appeal. Way out of fucking line. So ridiculous. Bitches gotta read.
Comment
-
What I believe also affects the situation is the full scope of the situation.. She is a scammer, and an idiot. I agree that the buyer should been wiser with auctions, however, the whole auction was designed and set up to grossly misrepresent and deceive. Enough said. Logic comes into play here, and its a very cut and dry case as to what the intent was. You already have evidence, past history, intent, and a logical thinking population. When the weight was listed as 4.9 ounces, that alone did it. Period. Same as if I was paid $60 to cut your grass, and I went out and cut one blade of grass. I wouldnt have a case in court. Period, end of story. I would be lambasted just as this fat bitch was. She needs to get a real freakin job before she scams the wrong person and ends up in a box.
There are people out there who would gladly break many bones over $500, I def would, thats for sure, so she should consider herself lucky and learn from it.01 325Ci
87 325iS w/ M30B35 swap
Comment
-
Obviously no one would pay 200+ for a picture of a phone. During Christmas email addresses with WII in them were selling for over 1000.00 (deceptively written ad copy with huge glossy pictures) Talk about the grinch who stole Christmas!
I hate scammers and think she got much less than she deserves. I hope the authorities get all up in her business like JJ threatened.
[IMG]https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/my350z.com-vbulletin/550x225/80-parkerbsig_5096690e71d912ec1addc4a84e99c374685fc03 8.jpg[/IMG
Comment
Comment