SOME THOUGHTFULL EXPLAINATION(LONG)

Well, I said I would'nt be back for a while but from the personal responses from several forum members, i thought I should explain myself.(By the way DOK, thanks for the oppurtunity to voice my opinion and for keeping the Forum going) Please read the following disclaimer:" These remarks are not necessarily the opinion of other forum members, nor do they necessarily reflect in whole or in part the administration of this website." "Further, any likeness to anyone either deceased or living is purely coincidental, and is meant as educational" I recieved allot of feedback regarding my last posting with regards to the purchase of Lugers. I posted for the bennifit of the new collectors to this field of collecting, as a BROAD WARNING to keep their heads clear and their feet on the ground before purchasing their first or hundredith Luger. I got response from several dealers who somehow thought I was talking about them specifically.(see above disclaimer)More of you thought I was right in my cautionary statements. here is the situation:


BUYER A BUYS A FEW LUGERS FROM SELLER A ON LAYAWAY, SUCESSFULLY PUTTING A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THE POCKET OF SELLER A. BUYER A DECIDES TO BUY ANOTHER LUGER FROM SELLER A. BUYER A ASKS SELLER A WHAT HE SHOULD GET. SELLER A SELLS BUYER A ANOTHER LUGER, STATING AT THE TIME OF SALE THAT THE GUN IS "MINT PERFECT" IN EVERY WAY. PAYMENTS ON THE NEW LUGER ARE A LITTLE SLOW, BUT SELLER A KNOWS THAT BUYER A REALLY WANTS THE PIECE AND HAS AGREED TO STREACH THE PAYMENT OUT.(IT'S REALLY EXPENSIVE, AT LEAST TO BUYER A). ALLMOST A YEAR GOES BY AND BUYER A PLANS ON ATTENDING A GUNSHOW IN NOME ALASKA, WHERE THE DEALER WILL BE. THEY MAKE PLANS TO MEET AND THE GUN WILL BE PAID OFF AT THAT SHOW. KEEP IN MIND THAT THE BUYER HAS BEEN MINDFULL OF THE KINDNESS THE DEALER HAS SHOWN HIM, AND HAS GIVEN THE DEALER A FEW GIFTS OF SIGNIFICANT MONETARY VALUE FOR HIS TROUBLE. UPON ARRIVING AT THE SHOW, THE GUN IS PRESENTED TO THE BUYER. THE BUYER THEN NOTICES A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM WITH THE GUN THAT MAY HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED BY THE SELLER, BUT NONE THE LESS THE GUN IS NOT AS DESCRIBED AND IS THEREFORE NOT WORTH THE PRICE. THE BUYER OFFERS TO PICK OUT A DIFFERENT GUN, BUT THE SELLER STATES HE WILL JUST REFUND THE DEPOSIT AMOUNT TO THE BUYER. THE NEXT DAY, THE SELLER HAS RECONSIDERED AND STATES HE WILL REFUND ONLY A PORTION OF THE DEPOSIT, WHEN THE GUN SELLS. THE FOLLOWING WEEK THE SELLER INFORMS THE BUYER THAT HE DOES'NT PLAN ON SELLING THE GUN FOR A WHILE, LEAVING THE BUYER WITHOUT ANY OF HIS DEPOSIT. WHAT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF BOTH THE BUYER AND SELLER? REMEMBER THE GUN IS NOT AS STATED INITIALLY. THE BUYER DIDN'T MERELY CHANGE HIS MIND AS TO THE PURCHASE. THE POINT I TRIED TO MAKE WAS, DON'T BUY A LUGER WITHOUT SEEING IT IN PERSON OR GET A WRITTEN GUARENTEE THAT STATES THAT THE GUN MAY BE RETURNED FOR A COMPLETE REFUND IF NOT AS DESCRIBED. I REALLY THINK IT SHOULD HOLD TRUE FOR ANY TYPE OF SALE PERIOD. IF YOU ADVERTISE A COLT SINGLE ACTION AS NEW, UNFIRED, UNTURNED, IT SHOULD BE THAT WAY WHEN THE BUYER TAKES POSSETION OF IT. IF NOT THE MONEY SHOULD BE RETURNED IMMEDIATELY, NO QUESTIONS ASKED. THIS IS MERELY A SITUATION, MEANT AS AN ILLUSTRATION. VERY INTERESTED IN FEEDBACK.


TIM

Well Tim, being an uneducated sort of mass and expensive Luger buyer, I think that this is one of those situations where both buyer and seller should have a contract.


Then when it states cost of $8,000 dollars, and payment will be made as soon as possible (leaving options open, as per your scenario), that the gun is in 98% shape, rare, etc., so the buyer would have proper recourse if the item is not as stated.


Now, since this is a hand shake deal, the old buyer beware is prevailing and ever present.


The buyer is the one at risk -- monetarily


The Seller is at risk for their honesty and integrity.


So, if it was me:

I am upset, I tell my story to Bob, who tells it to Sally, and down the list, and the seller has lost several potential buyers. If the seller has a good reputation, then one or two irritated buyers won't make much difference, but many stories and they loose tons of money in the long haul.


Overall from the scenario, and I too would have offered to get another Luger. Then the seller should have thought this acceptable. More than likely the seller knew of this defect and became much more irritated after the Buyer refused the pistol.


And steamed abut it later and then wanted to keep the deposit.


Obviously the smart thing is to get another gun, no loss of deposit, as the original contract, a Verbal Contract and binding in some jurisdictions would show that the gun was not perfect and had defects.


But many of these things come down to what you said, he saidâ?¦.


Ed

EXACTLY!


THANKS!


TIM

[John D.]

Let me try to distill some comments MADE IN YOUR SCREAMING (yea, I hate ALL CAPS)...


First of all - most dealers have defined lay away policies. Most are 2 - 3 months. Period. Ralph Shattuck, seeing as how many on this Forum know him - has a stated policy of:


"All time payments, lay aways or purchases made in my shop or from me at shows are final."


"No Refunds after 6 Months on any lay aways. "


"Cancellations of all lay aways up to 6 months forfeit 33% of deposit."


You can view it yourself here: http://www.worldoflugers.com/policies.html - and frankly, after purchasing many Lugers "on lay away, 2 - 3 months is considered the maximum. Six months is more then enough...


Second â?? â??THE BUYERâ?�, in your example - appears confused - a "lay away" is NOT a right to reserve an "inspection period". A Luger put on lay away is PURCHASED by you the day that first deposit is received! In short - a dealer is NOT â??THE BUYERâ??Sâ?� banker, your financier nor your pawn shop. On that note - I think a lay away for a year is asking the dealer to finance a Luger you can't afford to begin with - sorry to be so blunt.


From a dollar standpoint - Business 101 states that the Dealer has actually starts losing money on a gun starting at the second month of a lay away period. Using "round numbers - look at it this way... Say a high-end Luger is priced at $4,000. That inventory turns about once every 2 months with a Dealer margin at 20% - 30%. Let's use 25% just for arguments sake. So over the course of the YEAR you have had that Luger on lay away - that dealer has sacrificed approximately $24,000 in CASH FLOW and $6,000 in Net Margins!!! On a $4,000 Luger??!!!!... Hmmmm...


Now, what you have stated Tim - is that â??THE BUYERâ?� tried to use the dealer to finance a Luger â??THE BUYERâ?� couldn't afford in the first place (or it wouldn't have been on lay away for a YEAR?). You also failed to tell us what the "SUBSTIANTIAL AMOUNT" â??THE BUYERâ?� had down on that Luger after an entire year? (was it even 25% of the overall purchase price or 50% of the purchase price???).


IMHO - it sounds like â??THE BUYERâ?� wanted an excuse to get "out of the deal" to begin with. If â??THE BUYERâ?� weren't confused about what a lay away policy is (it is a PURCHASE, and nothing less.) Then â??THE BUYERâ?� should have shown up at the show - paid for the Luger in full, then used the 3-day inspection period to return the Luger as "not represented" or ask for a partial refund. Sorry - â??THE BUYERâ?� can't have it both ways - asking a dealer to finance him, then reneging on a deal before that deal is transacted.


As an example - â??THE BUYERâ?� should try walking into a car dealership - putting a deposit on a factory ordered car - and then DON'T show up at the dealership for a year(???!!!) - and DEMAND their deposit back â?? in full â?? after that year. â??THE BUYERâ?� would be laughed off the dealers lot - if they aren't sued for breach of contract in the meantime.


Bottom line - if â??THE BUYERâ?� can't afford a Luger - don't put it on lay away and ask a dealer to finance it for them. In the example I used - without even compounding the Gross and the Net â?? â??THE BUYERâ?� has cost them $24,000 in cash flow and $6,000 in margin on a $4,000 Luger over the course of a year. Please feel free to post back how much â??THE BUYERâ?� put down versus the original cost of the Luger - so we have the story intact in your example.


(And BTW: DOK is the Webmaster, and if you mean, "keep this Forum going" from an operational standpoint, then you are most welcome. To note - I'm the one who gets to pay (out of my own pocket) each and every month the operational costs of this site including the monthly Internet connections, servers, software, server coding, upgrades, maintenance, electrical bills, insurance, etc.).

John I agree with what you say as a seller.


However, there is an implication that a buyer has to buy the Luger whether it meets specifications or percentage of stated value, specifically "Mint Perfect"? and although I agree that a contract is a contract, and that the long period of layaway was excessive, but no written contract screws both the parties? The seller should state that this has been an excessive amount of time and either keep the deposit or refund it. If a seller tells me he'll refund the deposit and then the next day decides to keep the deposit, I too would be upset. Also, if a person has a stated layaway policy, then not going by it should forfeit any deposit.


I believe the problem is the lack of communication between the parties, a handshake deal is difficult for all involved.


In this part of the scenario; The Buyer Offers To Pick Out A Different Gun, But The Seller States He Will Just Refund The Deposit Amount To The Buyer. The Next Day, The Seller Has Reconsidered And States He Will Refund Only A Portion Of The Deposit, When The Gun Sells. The Following Week The Seller Informs The Buyer That He Doesnâ??t Plan On Selling The Gun For A While, Leaving The Buyer Without Any Of His Deposit.


This changing of communication is why I felt the seller was wrong. It appears to me that the seller found that the gun would not sell for the amount originally stated and so wanted to keep the deposit, therefore the loss of income to be retrieved as John stated.


Although I feel that the buyer should be aware that their deposit should probably be forfeit, that is not what the seller stated to him.

Since this is a handshake deal, then what is said should be what is done.


You could say the same thing about the buyer, except if the Luger does not meet "mint Perfect" and (yes this is in the eye of the beholder), then the seller has not met their part of the bargain. In many antiques, guns etc., Mint Perfect is almost brand new.


Ed

[John D.]

Hi Ed.!


Thanks for the comments back - and let me address a few of your points, as I think it may be helpful for some.


A "law away" is a purchase. It isn't anything less. In other words, if you go to a car dealer - and put a deposit on a car - they move it from the "For Sale" line to the "Sold" line. Using that same analogy - a gun dealer removes a Luger that has a deposit on it from their "For Sale" inventory to their "Sold" area. Now - if you have a Luger on "lay away" - my guess is you'd be pretty upset of that Dealer sold it while you had a deposit - I know I would! So, in fact - there is an implied agreement between the buyer and the seller that the item is "sold".


In so far as the changing of communication - Tim doesn't state who the dealer is â?? so we donâ??t know if they have stated policies or not. That any dealer would even consider giving back the full deposit after a year is unimaginable - but I've heard of stranger things.


For that - you pose an interesting question - did the gun sell for the same price as Tim had put on lay away? Only Tim or the dealer could only answer that - as we are still waiting for additional details like


- How much in total $$ was put down during that year (Tim represents it as a "substantial amount" - so my guess would be about 50% to 75% of the price of Luger? If it was less then 50% after a year, I'd challenge that it was a substantial amount given the final purchase price - especially after a year..?)


- We also don't know what the Luger's selling price was - so my $24,000 annual cash flow loss may be understated or over stated... Also, did the dealer take the same price from the new buyer?


- And how soon after the deal went "South" was that Luger re-sold? If it was less then the example I used for my 2 months cash flow scenario - then perhaps the inventory turn example I used should be restated to that period (1 month or three months or... - for example?)....


Anyway - lots of questions - but my guess is that there are two sides to the story. There always are...


Best to you Ed..!!! See you this week!!!!!

[Lonnie Zimmerman]

If the gun was misrepresented you should get all your money back!! PERIOD.


Lonnie

[John D.]

Well - I would agree - IF THE LUGER were actually paid for through fulfilling the buyers purchase.... That's not the case (and why there are post-purchase inspection periods). It has been on lay away for a YEAR(!!..???) and we still don't know the amount of the lay away dollars, the balance outstanding, the return policy of the dealer, the total amount of the Luger, the.. well - a lot of questions are unanswered, aren't they? Before anyone jumps to a conclusion - wouldn't it be nice to have the FULL story?

[Johnny Peppers]

The dealer is not without fault for letting the deal string out that long. If no rules were established the dealer should have given the buyer the opportunity to either pay for the pistol in full after a reasonable length of time, or give the purchaser another option such as purchasing another pistol with the money already paid. The rules should have been made up front rather than at the end of the deal.

I didn't ask for your opinions with regards to anyones layaway policy, that's between the seller and buyer and was never discussed other than the fact that the period was allowed was fine until the gun, which was presented with an obvious flaw was rejected by the buyer because it was and I REPEAT not up to the standards of a mint, unissued, unfired, perfect gun. The rest of the story is really no one elses business allthough I can see it has been shared in quite detail. The bottom line is that regardless of the type of sale, the buyer should be assurred that the gun is in the same condition at the time of sale as it is when delivered. Period. If the seller, for example moves his guns around in his or her safe, it is their responsibility to excercise care in the handling and preservation of guns allready sold. Period, exclaimation point! The same applys to Walmart or the finest gun shop in the world. If the seller does not want to agree to this rule, I caution (especially new buyers) to see the gun first hand, note any defects, and agree mutually that the gun is as stated. If they can't, wait till another comes allong. Bottom line there was never a problem until the gun was presented in less than stated condition. Be assurred that the seller in this case was well compensated during the "layaway" period.


Tim

I know you would be rather upset if the $30,000.00 Jeep you bought had a great big dent in the hood when you decided to pick it up and would probably ask to get a different Jeep. In your scenario the dealership is responsible for the care of that Jeep while in their custody and care. Regardless of whether or not the owners son, backed into a parked car. In your scenario, I would urge the car buyer to check the car over carefully at the time of sale for any dents, scrapes, or paint chips. When the Jeep is delivered it better be in the same condition as when bought. Now if the buyer calls his FRIEND the dealer and asks if they have any new jeeps for sale but lives two thousand miles away, he trusts his friend who is well known for his Jeeps that the Jeep is new and in perfect condition. things go on for a while and the buyer makes payments, with no problem ever expressed by the seller that he is taking too long to pay for the Jeep(by the way the terms of the agreement are between the buyer and seller and really not in question here) The buyer comes two thousand miles to pic up the Jeep as agreed. Whala! the cover is taken off the Jeep. The buyer states he no longer wants THAT Jeep, but will gladly take the one sitting next to it. The dealer flips out, and says I keep your deposit and you get screwed. It is not that the buyer has chosen to get a pickup truck, he just wants what he agreed to pay for. UNFORTUNEATELY things heat up and they decide to part ways. The buyer who trusted his FRIEND to do the right thing is both disillusioned, and out a great deal of money(no it's none of your business how much!) The buyer merely warns others, especially new Jeep buyers not to make the same mistake! After, all it's the best thing he can do, and very good advice. Hopefully the dealer will do the right thing, next time, if he chooses not to, he will certainly loose business from future car buyers. No one should ever be forced to buy a pig in a poke no matter what the price or percieved status of the seller.


Tim


Tim

Rick,


I have never wanted to boil this person in oil. I merely trusted his opinion, as an expert, the gun wasn't as described, I wanted my money back, he didn't do it, the friendship was compromised, I'm out allot of money, that I can't afford. All I have ever said was don't take anyones word as true, no matter who they are. Your sentiments "Buyer Beware" rings true in the point I'm trying to get across. If you don't have a WRITTEN guarentee, don't buy a gun especially, an expensive one just on the word of another person without seeing it in person.


Tim

[John D.]

For those how have better things to do then read lengthy posts ) here is a summary of the points Iâ??m about to make below:


Tim, your analogy is off base â?? your example states that you â??purchased the carâ?�;


You continue to discount the details as no ones business â?? but you started this thread;


As the website owner, in many lawyers eyes, I am personally liable for posts to this Forum - so you bet I'll be sure comments are fair and represent both sides of an issue; and


Threatening use of the Luger Forum as a public purview before posting your note to settle a private dispute makes it â??my businessâ?� as the operator of this Forum and owner of the Domain Name (see legal ramifications below)â?¦


Details on these points continue hereâ?¦.


- Can you name me a single car dealer that would store your car for a YEAR on a deposit only? Your entire post is predicated on the fact that you had already paid for the car.


- In your previous replies, you make mention that the â??detailsâ?� are nobodyâ??s business. Well â?? since you posted the original note â?? YOU made the details everyoneâ??s business. For some reason, it would appear however that when those same deatils may not support a perceived position, the details donâ??t seem to matter much?


- Then you wrote â??â?¦I can see it has been shared in quite detailâ?�. Yes, as the owner/operator of this site (which is why my comment yesterday as to ownership was entirely relevant) â?? I am the same person who gets included in on lawsuits â?? threatened, implied or real â?? when a dealer or private individual feels they are libeled within this same Forum. As in this specific thread, I am the same one who is duly notified when a dealer is sent an e-mail by a â??customerâ?� days before a Post appears, where the dissatisfied customer has threatened the dealer with use of this Public Forum in an effort to gain public support. And to stop that post, the Dealer had better pay out the refund the customer feels they are entitled to â?? whether rightfully or wrongfully. In my humble opinion â?? thatâ??s little short trying to gather a â??lynch mobâ?� and force a dealer into a position they havenâ??t previously agreed. I believe others have referred to it as â??blackmailâ?�, but Iâ??ll let the readers derive their own acronym for what they prefer to call it. In short â?? if you have a gripe â?? either work it out with the Dealer privately â?? or post your side in objective format and with all the facts to this Forum publicly. Threatening the use of this Forum just doesnâ??t cut it â?? and yes, typically the website operator will be notified of those impending threats. Oh â?? and by the way â?? should anyone decide to post their gripe publicly, then they should be aware that they certainly have opened up themselves and their actions to the scrutiny of thousands of readers. In other words â?? you are responsible for your own actions and posts â?? and any consequences that are generated from them.


As a personal commentary - if you are under the false impression that the â??formatâ?� and â??purposeâ?� of this Forum is for private use of a public polling area to force a dealer to see â??your point of viewâ?� - then you are way off base. If Iâ??m wrong in that â?? then I donâ??t need, nor want - the legal, financial and personal liabilities associated with these sites and their operation that would allow people to post one-sided commentary unchallenged â?? nor would people believe that they are not responsible for the content within their own posts. To represent both side of an issue fairly is fine. To state all the facts, as you know them, is also fine - but by your own admission - such is not the case in this thread by your discounting the details as irrelevant. To that point - I can tell you this Forum NOT to be used as a veiled attempt to try and set Dealer Policies for the personal gain of one disenfranchised customer.


Good luck to you.

[John Sabato]

Your tactful and honorable effort to keep the forum on track and provide the basis for it's operation is GREATLY appreciated ...


Thanks from one grateful user, (but I am sure I speak for many)


regards,

-John Sabato

[Thor]

Ditto John and John. I support John D FULLY!! ~Thor~

As the owner of the forum, you asked for the details and facts regarding this posting, so I'll give you what you have asked for as the "owner" of the forum. This will be my last posting as I feel that I am no longer welcome here. First of all the details were left out(name, amount, specifics) for several reasons, not the least of which was an attempt to save all partys embarrassment and get objective answers/advice from the other forum members whose opinion I value. At no time did I attempt to or assume to "blackmail" anyone. Those who have taken the time to get to know me, know I would never do this to anyone, especially the dealer in question. I still have too much respect for him and the contributions he has made to this hobby. I will stand by this. I do not think that one action by another person makes that person, any less a valueable human being. The term "blackmail" was first mentioned, with regard to this matter in an E-Mail sent to me, by Ken Kontos, who had absolutely no business becoming involved in this matter. I tried as best as I could to keep this matter between the dealer and myself. When I could get no where towards the resolution of this matter with the dealer, I informed him that I would bring it to the forum for discussion, leaving out the names of the partys involved. I brought this to the forum, to get, as I stated, honest feedback, without any preconcieved biases either positive or negative regarding the dealer. It was never meant to be hurtfull, spitefull, or aimed at discrediting the dealer, as I don't think he set out to misrepresent anything intentionally, at least that is my impression. The circumstances are simple. The gun was represented at the time of sale as being of a higher grade than it was at the time of transfer. No malice, no evidence of intentional deception, no character defimation, just the above fact. The facts from my viewpoint as the buyer are as follows:


1) In February 2001, after successfully purchasing, two Lugers from Ralph Shattuck, I telephoned him to see if there was another piece for sale that he thought I might want. He stated that he had two "mint, unfired, unissued, perfect Swiss Lugers for sale"

2) As I did not yet have a Swiss Luger, especially in that condition, I asked him again if they were indeed as he stated. I was again told that they were of the highest quality, and were for the "advanced collector".

3) I asked if I could put one on Layaway, and stated that it would probably be a while longer to pay this one off as it was $3000.00 (the top end retail price for a mint Swiss Bern). His replied that I could take as long as I needed, and was in no rush.

4) I sent a down payment along with two custom made knives at no charge as a thank you for our friendship and the oppurtunity to put the gun on an extended layaway.

5) Upon reciept of the payment, Mr. Shattuck called to thank me and commented that the knives were beautiful and actually held a spot in his Luger display. I felt of course very honored by this.

6) As time went on, I made payments as I could, on the Luger and was under no impression at anytime that the layaway was creating any financial or other hardships.

7) In the fall of 2001, realizing that the layaway was longer than expected, I offered to begin to pay some interest on the remaining balance. Mr. Shattuck stated that this was not necessary, and considered me to be his friend.

At this point, I asked him to send me a copy of his Deputy Badge, as I was having a very special knife made for him. He sent the copy, but after several attempts the image would not fit into the handle nicely.

9) I continued to try and make a knife for him that he would be even proader of. Finally I got the idea to put a Luger in the handle and put to: and from: on the handle.

10) The knife was completed, and I called Mr. Shattuck to let him know, and asked him to reserve a table badge for me at the Kansas City Gun Show in late January. He stated it was his pleasure. I was excited to present the knife to him personally.

11) Shortly after this, he sent me an E-Mail, very politely asking when the Luger would be paid off. I stated that I would bring some things to sell in Kansas City, and planned to pick the Gun up there. Mr. Shattuck stated this was fine.

12) When I arrived at the show, I picked up my badge and found his table. Before I even looked at the gun I presented the knife to him. Needless to say he was pleased with it stating he "would show it off at the Luger gathering in March."

13) Then he took out the Swiss Bern, I had waited so long to get. I looked at it and my heart literally sank, when I saw the scratch on the frame extending down into the grip.

14) He asked what was wrong, and could tell that something was bothering me. I showed him the scratch and asked him if I could just get another gun in it's place. He got angry stating that he had had the gun on hold for me for such a long time and could have sold the gun several times over. I felt as low as the bellybutton on an ant! He stated "thats allright I'll just give you your money back". I asked him "you want me to be happy with the gun don't you" Mr. Shattuck didn't respond. I asked him later if he was mad. He said he wasn't and said goodnight and went to his hotel.

15) The next day I sat at his table and told him how I had felt bad all night. He stated he had reconsidered and would only give me my money back when he sold the gun, which he said wouldn't take very long. He stated we were still friends and this was just business. I agreed to this, knowing he was going to the Las Vegas Show the following weekend, and felt sure that he would surely sell it there.

16) He left early Sunday morning and I didn't hear from him until he returned from the Las Vegas Show the following week.

17) I E-Mailed him to ask how he did at the show. He said it was great, busy and he sold allot of guns. I re-emailed him to ask if he sold the Swiss Bern? He replied he didn't take it with him, and didn't plan on offering it for sale in the near future.

18) This is where things got messy to say the least. I honestly thought I would never see my money again. Mr. Shattuck got very angry. I demanded that I get my money back. He then stated I would only get a portion of the deposit back, and hoped it would take a year to sell the gun. It was at this point that I posted to the forum about not buying any Luger before looking at it first, and being carefull not to put high expectations on anyone regardless of their reputation. I was carefull not to mention anyone in particular, but got an e-mail from Mr. Shattuck, stating that I was referring to him.

19) Yes I was disappointed, and felt I deserved better treatment.

20) Last friday I E-Mailed Mr. Shattuck stating that on Monday I was going to post to the forum regarding this situation and see what other forum members thought should take place. I was very carefull not to mention any names, as I was trying to keep this somewhat confidential in hopes Mr. Shattuck would change his mind and refund my money. It is after all, MY MONEY. The bottom line is that the gun was not in the condition stated at the time of the purchase, when I was presented it at the time of transfer at the Kansas City Gun Show Period. I disagree that the gun was not purchased, it was, and I fully expected it to be in the condition stated, it wasn't period. I further resent the statement that I should not purchase guns I can't afford. You don't know me and it really isn't any of your business, John, high exalted owner of the GRAND LUGER FORUM. By the way the money at stake is $625.00 in deposit, it may not be much to some of you but it is an awfull lot to me. Had the gun been as stated, it would have been paid for. I hope this satisfies your curiosity as to the details. See no threats, blackmail, only disappointment. By the way Ralph, I encourage you to post your side of the story as I don't think it will be any different. If any of you have any questions feel free to ask me, and I will do my best to explain myself.


Thank You To All Who Have Shown Your Support!

Better READ THIS FAST, as I'm sure the thread will be deleated soon after posting.


My Very Best To You All! Another time!


Tim


Tim

[John Sabato]

I hope your is off!


YOU brought this matter to the forum, and this is not the first time you have discussed some of the details of this matter, including who are the parties are that were involved...


While this particular post does apparently tell all of your side of the story, your inability to accept legally valid comments that you ASKED for is not the forum's problem... it is yours.


I always tell people not to ask questions unless they are prepared to hear the answer. Apparently you have allowed your bitterness to interfere with your judgement. Leaving the forum because you found no real sympathy here for the way you handled your plight is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.


You were, and ARE among friends here who have common interests... If you feel compelled to leave, it is not because you are unwelcome, but because your behavior has made you temporarily unpopular by your own choices.


Tomorrow should be another day for another discussion...


There are no "Cliques" or "IN-Crowd" on this forum... only Luger enthusiasts with common interests in learning more about the history and use of this pistol... Some participate more often than others based on their level of interest, expertise, and their available time... Even those with no lugers, and no techical expertise but with a healthy attitude toward learning are VERY welcome here.


I urge you to take the criticism of your plight in the spirit it was intended - as honest opinion of what has transpired - and to hang around...


I have no idea what age you are, but to angrily stomp off into self imposed exile is not what anyone I know would consider mature behavior... and I think that would even include you if you were not one of the subjects in this situation. My recommendation is to chill out and objectively work out the details with your dealer "friend" to each of your satisfactions...


Whether Ralph Shattuck replies here is of no consequence to your behavior on the forum...


John D. spoke to you in clear terms about the appropriateness of the discussion and the impact such a discussion could have for him personally as the business owner and host of this forum.


I think you owe him an apology...


Take some time and discuss the whole thread with someone whose opinion you can count on to be objective and see if you don't agree...


Luger enthusiasts should stick together... not each other.


regards,


John Sabato

[John D.]

Tim,


Thank you for sharing your view. Iâ??ll let folks draw their own assumptions from your post. I would only add a few details and insights you seem to have overlooked.


For example - you appear to have forgotten to mention that you had e-mailed Ralph an apology on Monday morning â?? well before your post to this forum. I happened to be on the phone with Ralph at the time, who was sincerely touched by your note. His comment to me was that it was probably a mis-communication, and he would speak to Nancy about using your deposit on another Luger of your choice OR refunding a majority of your deposit. Somehow â?? since you have a difficult time being consistent â?? I would think you have probably killed that option with your post later to this Forum that same day â?? fulfilling the threat you placed with him on Friday via e-mail. â??Being responsible for ones own actionsâ?� is one of my favorite sayings, so if you donâ??t get satisfaction from Ralph on this issue, its your doing, certainly not his. In my experience, and I donâ??t believe Iâ??m alone â?? Ralph always does right by his customers, even when he puts himself against his own policies in doing so. In your case, it was closer then you know â?? but you â??got in your own wayâ?�. Please, Tim - do finally take responsibility for your own actions. I am somewhat curious as to why you threatened Ralph Friday with a public post, sent an apology Monday morning - and then posted your diatribe Monday afternoon? Perhaps a detailed comment there could enlighten us - and let us know which was insincere, your apology or your post - as they are in opposition to each other?


Further â?? Iâ??ll let a total $625 deposit after a full year for a $3000 Luger speak for itself. My opinion is unchanged â?? that you shouldnâ??t ask or expect a dealer to finance a Luger you canâ??t afford. A dealer isn't your banker. I wonâ??t even bother trying to justify the Dealer Gross Margin and Cash flow you have cost a dealer during that entire year, nor try to explain why you won't take any accountability for those same losses - except to note that at the rate of $625 a year, the $3000 Luger would have been on â??lay awayâ?� for almost six years? Your actions certainly do not portray those of a customer who can afford the purchase nor are serious about fulfilling their obligations in a purchase agreement to a dealer â?? certainly within their stated lay away periods?


You state: â??John, high exalted owner of the GRAND LUGER FORUM..â?� By all means â?? please do go set up your own forum. You finance it. You program it. You host it. You set your own policies and then pay for it all each and every month. Itâ??s only several hundred dollars each month for this site alone. At the same time - then even someone like you can become its â??exalted ownerâ?�, and as well, liable for itâ??s operation and content. Then, the folks that feel that they have been libeled by one-sided or skewed posts can contact *you* â?? and then you can spend your money on your own lawyers defending your right to operate your site. Certainly, I donâ??t force you to post here, but when you do â?? itâ??s a privilege, *and not your RIGHT* â?? and you are responsible for your own posts and their content and repercussions. A simple observance of some fairly straightforward, common sense rules are in order. If you have a difficult time understanding what those rules are â?? perhaps you should elect not to post here at all? Your choice â?? not mine. In the meantime â?? I would simply ask you donâ??t try to trivialize my role in trying to keep the legal ramifications to a minimum.


You Stated: â??Better READ THIS FAST, as I'm sure the thread will be deleated soon after Postingâ?�. Nope â?? this thread will remain intact as is â?? as you know, I rarely delete threads. Iâ??m sure people will see it for what it is, which may be somewhat embarrassing to you. Fortunately, I donâ??t share that same concern. I feel as confident Ralph doesnâ??t share that concern of being the least bit embarrassed, either.


It will be interesting to see what the conversation is when we all meet at our hostsâ?? house in Arizona later this week â?? Ralph and Nancy Shattuck. My guess is that this subject may come up. But given your ability to diminish responsibility for your own actions - that probably wonâ??t embarrass you, either.


Good luck to you.

You asked for the details, and you got them. I retrospect there are a few things left to say:


1) I'm sorry I even mentioned anything about this on this forum. It was clearly not the place to bring up a private matter.

2) Obviously far too much personal information was shared, with people who had no business knowing it.

3) I sincerely apologize for any harm my posting has caused to ANYONE.

4) I NEVER threatned or blackmailed anyone.


5)My apology to Mr. Shattuck is and will be as far as I am concerned private and personal but dealt rather with the entire situation not the specifics of the incident.

6) The original post was to be a generality which was forced into specifics.

7) No more needs to be said on the topic either positive or negative. it is between Mr. Shattuck and myself.


Thanks To All!


Tim

[John D.]

I truly appreciate, and of course, accept your apology. Trust me when I say that operating an oftentimes â??emotionally chargedâ?� discussion Forum isnâ??t all itâ??s cracked up to be.


Further, I also owe you an apology. After posting my first response to this thread, a â??well-wisherâ?� informed me that for certain reasons, it is more expedient and practical for you to use all caps. Had I known that beforehand, I never would have made a comment in that context. So, please accept my apology in the spirit in which it is offered.


See you in the Forums!


John D.