[quote] the mantra which I have heard repeated on this forum to the effect that because a dealer handles "a lot of guns" somehow he should not be held responsible for misrepresenting an item's condition or originality <hr></blockquote>
Garfield,
Time permitting, I make an attempt to read virtually every post that is made on this forum... I can't remember seeing a post that even implied that any dealer "should not be held responsible for misrepresenting an item's condition or originality"...
I would be very grateful if you could you please point out the URL for such a message thread...
I admit that I have seem some posts that said that a dealer may not have personally inspected every item he sells, but that didn't imply that they were absolved of the responsibility for merchandise that was less than advertised.
I said in a post earlier this week:
Get the terms in WRITING, get photographs, ...and get all the advise you can from knowedgeable people before you make a decision to purchase.
If a dealer violates his own purchase agreement terms, he won't be in business very long. You might be able to fault a dealer about his merchandise, but the conditions of the sale apply to both parties. In this transaction, the gun wasn't returned within the period specified... that is an unfortunate lesson for the buyer...
Ron Wood said above, some dealers will eat the loss in such a circumstance... and some will make the customer eat the loss--not very conducive to repeat business... but it happens.
Here is an enlargement of the blemish that Jan refered to:
Personally I have a hard time seeing this amount of damaged finish being successfully hidden by cold blue so that it couldn't be seen with the naked eye... The cold blue certainly would not match the original finish even covered with some oil IMHO...
I feel sorry for both parties to this transaction.
Caveat Emptor ( and Caveat Vendor...)