Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thank you, Brian, Elder Statesman, and Camera Store Owner - There is no question that reputations were unfairly besmirched in the exchange, and your obviously trying, voluntary effort should go a long way to undue whatever damage was done. And, yes, standard policies would make a great deal of sense. B. D. -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Brian Reid Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 9:39 AM To: LUG@leica-users.org Subject: [Leica] in the matter of Theken v Lowi On February 27, Mark Theken posted to the LUG a charge that he had been defrauded in a camera-sale transaction by another member of the LUG. Its subject was FS: Buyer Beware! an open letter and you can read the message here: http://leica-users.org/v26/msg10016.html While that message did not identify the seller, subsequent conversations brought out that the seller was Emmanuel Lowi. Both parties have since unsubscribed from the LUG. While the hubbub about this charge has died down on the LUG, the work to resolve it has not. One of the Elder Statesmen of the LUG has taken responsibility for mediating this dispute, and an experienced and respected camera store owner (not necessarily a member of the LUG) has reviewed all of the materials and talked to both parties. All three of us (the Elder Statesman, the camera store owner, and I), having reviewed everything, believe that no fraud took place, nor was there intent of fraud, and that neither party acted in bad faith. Whether Mr Lowi continues to think that Mr Theken acted in bad faith, or vice versa, is entirely a private matter and should not be further aired on the LUG. It is the finding of your listowner that this case is about the wisdom of buying expensive things from private sellers, or selling expensive things to private buyers, and not about actual fraud. The sale of high-priced items like automobiles and houses and boats has for many years had a formal paperwork process attached to it, in which there are official documents that help certify these expensive items. In other markets, such as fine art, antiques, stud bulls, and personal services, it is entirely up to the buyer to validate the transaction. There is a wide range of reasonable expectations in global trade. There is no established standard for the behavior of buyer and seller in the global used-camera market. Everyone has a perception based on his or her own background and culture. And when this much money is changing hands, everyone's emotions are high. I'm thinking that if we are going to allow advertising and trading on the LUG, that we ought to have a written document defining the expected behavior of both parties, so that we start out with agreement about what is expected. But as I said above, my opinion, based on the expert evaluations that I mentioned above, is that in this case of Theken v Lowi, there were mismatched expectations, mismatched cultural norms, and a lot of pride and emotion, but no fraud nor intent of fraud. Brian Reid LUG listowner _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information