Kim Coxon
Moderator
This is not a Scam alert but other members might be interested in a recent experience I had with a Ebay seller called mr*scheimpflug. I will try to keep it brief but if anyone wants any more details or corroboration, I will be happy to supply it.
I was looking for a later model SS M3. I wasn’t too interested in the mechanics because I was thinking about sending it to CRR for a black paint job but it did have to be in good working order. Now most of the M3’s that fit this bill in the UK or that have been offered here are DS ones or were SS ones in very good condition with a price to match. So I resorted to eBay (Yes I know I should know better but….). Anyway I found one from this seller. He had 100% feedback of over a 1000, it had a reasonable set of photos and was at a sensible price. The description said "Up for bid is a *GORGEOUS* Leica M3 Single Stroke Body in *GOOD* condition. This camera shows typical wear from age and average use. Shows some typical abrasions on the base plate and top plate and paint wear around the edges of the back flap; also shows a depression around the film rewind knob. Operationally, it is in tip-top condition. Vulcanite is excellent. Shutter speeds are accurate; self-timer works perfect. Viewfinder is clean and clear. Comes complete with front cap; no paperwork, no manual, no shoulder strap." Initial communication was good, I received tracking information and the camera was very well packed and the delivery was quick. As was usual and expected, I had to pay duty, tax and a handling charge before collecting the camera but I had calculated this into the price. 😀
The cosmetic condition was as described though a little “rosy”. However, it was immediately obvious that there were severe mechanical problems. The finder was dim (about the same as my Mir), the rangefinder lines were stuck on 135 and the shutter looked a bit odd. I spoke with CRR in Luton who agreed to have a look at for me and give me an estimate. I then emailed the seller with my concerns and told him of my intentions as returning the camera would cost me in excess of $280 due to his terms of purchase price refund only. I was asked to send the camera immediately.
I replied saying that I felt these terms were unacceptable. Had the camera been in the condition described, I would have been delighted but as the mechanical condition had been totally misrepresented I felt it unfair that I should lose over $280 for something which was solely attributable to the seller. I received a message which said It's your call. In this case, we will stand by our description that the camera is as described when it left our facilities. Who knows what could have happened after your received it. We don't do business for the purpose of neglecting such things. Our items are well tested, well described, and well packed when delivered. And from time to time, we end up with trouble makers that will claim anything to their desire to cause trouble to us. Given the return policy that we have, we also comply with our part of the contract. With this email of yours, you are declining and therefore unwilling to resolve this in an amicable manner. 😱
From here, everything went downhill. Shortly afterwards, I received the report CRR. The shutter wasn’t opening properly below 1/30sec and at 1/8 sec only 2/3 of the film plane was being exposed. In his opinion, such a fault was indicative of a faulty shutter brake and/or poor servicing. Furthermore he felt that the lubricant had dried out. He also confirmed the finder faults and went on to say that these faults were due 100% to the lack of/or poor servicing and that none of the faults could be attributed to transit damage and appeared to be long term. So much for it being in the condition described when sent and the strong hint that it was my entire fault. 😱
I sent the seller a copy of the report asking for a partial refund to cover the costs of repairs which by coincidence happened to be a similar sum to the one I would lose under the seller's "terms". In reply, I was informed by the seller that " We do not pay for repairs nor part of repairs for any reason. This is a classic scam practiced by many. We have fallen for that one time and will never again do so." 😕
I carefully replied saying that I could document all I had said and prove it wasn’t a scam. I received a terse reply which started “I didn't even read your lengthy email..” 😕 and went on later to say “You're accusations hits a personal button and you should watch your mouth (or your keyboard keys in this case). This will now be forwarded to our lawyer and see if we have grounds to pursue this matter legally. And don't think that you're insulated just because you're in UK. You are bordering slander." 😡
When I raised the matter with Paypal, they confirmed that the fault was with the seller. The seller then sent me an abusive email saying that I was harassing him and he would be suing both me and CRR for Fraud and me for slander. After I left neg feedback, I received various messages including the threat of legal action for liable! When I ignored these, he reported me to eBay and lied saying that I had failed to pay for the camera and as a result I was given a non payer strike. 😱 (eBay subsequently removed this when I send proof of payment.) 🙂
To be fair to the guy, he does have a long record of good deals but what I failed to notice before I bid was that there are also a number of “withdrawn” feedback comments and several neutrals about items not being as described and a rude and arrogant nature. He portrays himself as a “legitimate business” but I can find no record of any firm with any of the names he uses other than eBay auctions, his address is a PO box and he refuses to sign any messages. You could get a very good deal from him but you might want to consider my experience especially if there are any large shipping costs or tax/duty costs involved. 😉
Kim
I was looking for a later model SS M3. I wasn’t too interested in the mechanics because I was thinking about sending it to CRR for a black paint job but it did have to be in good working order. Now most of the M3’s that fit this bill in the UK or that have been offered here are DS ones or were SS ones in very good condition with a price to match. So I resorted to eBay (Yes I know I should know better but….). Anyway I found one from this seller. He had 100% feedback of over a 1000, it had a reasonable set of photos and was at a sensible price. The description said "Up for bid is a *GORGEOUS* Leica M3 Single Stroke Body in *GOOD* condition. This camera shows typical wear from age and average use. Shows some typical abrasions on the base plate and top plate and paint wear around the edges of the back flap; also shows a depression around the film rewind knob. Operationally, it is in tip-top condition. Vulcanite is excellent. Shutter speeds are accurate; self-timer works perfect. Viewfinder is clean and clear. Comes complete with front cap; no paperwork, no manual, no shoulder strap." Initial communication was good, I received tracking information and the camera was very well packed and the delivery was quick. As was usual and expected, I had to pay duty, tax and a handling charge before collecting the camera but I had calculated this into the price. 😀
The cosmetic condition was as described though a little “rosy”. However, it was immediately obvious that there were severe mechanical problems. The finder was dim (about the same as my Mir), the rangefinder lines were stuck on 135 and the shutter looked a bit odd. I spoke with CRR in Luton who agreed to have a look at for me and give me an estimate. I then emailed the seller with my concerns and told him of my intentions as returning the camera would cost me in excess of $280 due to his terms of purchase price refund only. I was asked to send the camera immediately.
I replied saying that I felt these terms were unacceptable. Had the camera been in the condition described, I would have been delighted but as the mechanical condition had been totally misrepresented I felt it unfair that I should lose over $280 for something which was solely attributable to the seller. I received a message which said It's your call. In this case, we will stand by our description that the camera is as described when it left our facilities. Who knows what could have happened after your received it. We don't do business for the purpose of neglecting such things. Our items are well tested, well described, and well packed when delivered. And from time to time, we end up with trouble makers that will claim anything to their desire to cause trouble to us. Given the return policy that we have, we also comply with our part of the contract. With this email of yours, you are declining and therefore unwilling to resolve this in an amicable manner. 😱
From here, everything went downhill. Shortly afterwards, I received the report CRR. The shutter wasn’t opening properly below 1/30sec and at 1/8 sec only 2/3 of the film plane was being exposed. In his opinion, such a fault was indicative of a faulty shutter brake and/or poor servicing. Furthermore he felt that the lubricant had dried out. He also confirmed the finder faults and went on to say that these faults were due 100% to the lack of/or poor servicing and that none of the faults could be attributed to transit damage and appeared to be long term. So much for it being in the condition described when sent and the strong hint that it was my entire fault. 😱
I sent the seller a copy of the report asking for a partial refund to cover the costs of repairs which by coincidence happened to be a similar sum to the one I would lose under the seller's "terms". In reply, I was informed by the seller that " We do not pay for repairs nor part of repairs for any reason. This is a classic scam practiced by many. We have fallen for that one time and will never again do so." 😕
I carefully replied saying that I could document all I had said and prove it wasn’t a scam. I received a terse reply which started “I didn't even read your lengthy email..” 😕 and went on later to say “You're accusations hits a personal button and you should watch your mouth (or your keyboard keys in this case). This will now be forwarded to our lawyer and see if we have grounds to pursue this matter legally. And don't think that you're insulated just because you're in UK. You are bordering slander." 😡
When I raised the matter with Paypal, they confirmed that the fault was with the seller. The seller then sent me an abusive email saying that I was harassing him and he would be suing both me and CRR for Fraud and me for slander. After I left neg feedback, I received various messages including the threat of legal action for liable! When I ignored these, he reported me to eBay and lied saying that I had failed to pay for the camera and as a result I was given a non payer strike. 😱 (eBay subsequently removed this when I send proof of payment.) 🙂
To be fair to the guy, he does have a long record of good deals but what I failed to notice before I bid was that there are also a number of “withdrawn” feedback comments and several neutrals about items not being as described and a rude and arrogant nature. He portrays himself as a “legitimate business” but I can find no record of any firm with any of the names he uses other than eBay auctions, his address is a PO box and he refuses to sign any messages. You could get a very good deal from him but you might want to consider my experience especially if there are any large shipping costs or tax/duty costs involved. 😉
Kim
