[Leica] fraud on the LUG

[buzz.hausner at verizon.net (Buzz Hausner)]

You still don't have it right, Don.  You are not in a position to say
that the, "buyer obviously received an item that could not be
authenticated as an original black paint camera."  Indeed, there is
every indication that the seller represented the M4 to the buyer
accurately, completely, and honestly.

	Buzz Hausner

-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+buzz.hausner=verizon.net@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+buzz.hausner=verizon.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf
Of Don Dory
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 4:38 PM
To: lug@leica-users.org
Subject: [Leica] fraud on the LUG

OK all, I went back and re-read most of the account of the black paint
M3.  I think the key point is intentional fraud.  From Brian's post, the
seller was acting in good faith, believing the camera to be an original
black paint camera.  The buyer obviously received an item that could not
be authenticated as an original black paint camera or he would not carp
about the price.

The buyer, after receiving the camera without the authenticating paper
work, tried to return the camera for a refund. This would appear to be a
normal request for an item whose value depends on some unique aspect, in
this case black paint, which could not be authenticated.