Luger disaster

[Bob Tracy]

Hi same old forum nothing changed no wonder I only visit onec in a while and am selling off my collection. Tried to put on some faces do not know if it worked,

[John Sabato]

Much goes on here Bob... I for one miss your voice here on the forum. Check in more often... and if you are selling, I am sure that one of the 500 registered members here may be interested in what you have...

Check out the For Sale forum...

warm regards,

John

[Thor]

I will miss you too Bob! Via con Dios Amigo! Stop by anytime!

[Heydrich]

I completely agree with Garfield’s two points. Just because a dealer handles and sells “a lot of guns” positively does not absolve him of responsibility for each individual sale. Using this kind of preposterous thinking, anyone could argue to his boss at work that he is “not accountable” for a screw-up because he had a lot of work to do that day, that Ford or GM are not responsible for the safety of the car you drive in because they make so many cars each day, or that your bank and credit card company are absolved of keeping accurate records because they have so many clients.

And like Garfield says, it is utterly ridiculous to come back with the “it’s still worth the same amount of money” BS after a collectable has been revealed for its true flawed condition, like that outrageous blemish. That approach is the epitome of being fast-talked by some con artist.

I am keeping careful track of any negative feedback made for Luger dealers here in this forum. Even one, and I will not deal with them. That may sound harsh, but it’s my own hard earned money to spend as I wish. And please don’t make any lame excuses for them. If you still have a warm and fuzzy feeling about a dealer who has gotten a serious negative feedback, you are more then welcome to continue to risk your own money with them.

[Herb]

Heydrich, I completley agree with you. While at the Reno gun show I had the opportunity to visit the table of a Luger dealer, at least I assumed he was a dealer in Lugers as that is all that he had on his table. He had a double dated Luger there and I asked him if it was ok to look at it. I then brought it into bifocal inspection length and saw that it was a 1918/1938 double date. I said to him, what is this 38 date thing? He replied, in essence, 'I really don't know, I just got that one a few days ago and haven't had time to really look it over'. Well, he is either a liar or a theif, or both and unfortunately I did not get his name in my haste to get away from his table. I sincerely hope that a newby to the collecting fraternity didn't buy that thing because he had heard of the 'double dated Lugers' being collectable, but there it was, ready for a high dollar sale based on the faked dates. Sad.

[Johnny Peppers]

Apparently the pistol was still worth $1495, just not to the seller.

[John Sabato]

[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...)

[Garfield]

John S:

Time permitting, I'll see if I can turn up the information requested. However, per you admission, if such comments are made to explain why a pistol was of a lesser quality than that as represented by a dealer, then, IMHO, the implication is that, for that reason, the dealer should not be held accountable.

Granted, you and I do not see eye-to-eye on some of these issues and I respect your right to disagree. And, perhaps, I imagined that such a thing was ever implied by a member of this forum.

One fact does remain, Rjennings indicates that members of this forum have conveyed the message that "a dealer handles many guns & cannot know everything about every weapon". Since this statemment was made during a discussion regarding the responsibilies of a dealer to a client, it would appear that Rjennings, at least, was lead to believe that such reasoning was a valid excuse for a pistol to be less than as represented by the dealer.

[Heinz]

Great picture John! Do those look like blue covered pits just in fron of the cleaned area?

regards, Heinz

[Luke]

Heinz,

I also had the impression that this area of the gun actually had pits which were, perhaps, more easily viewed after the cold blue was removed.

Luke

[Jan C Still]

Remember this series of posts when recommending a luger dealer to a new collector.

[lugerholsterrepair]

I have had quite a bit of experience with an older fellow, who incidentially is a good friend, who uses cold blue by the gallon. He used to sell many guns to Bob Simpson in Galesburg, IL and he tells me Bob would sniff out even a drop of cold blue and refuse to have any weapon in his shop that had so much as an atom of it applied. He learned not to show up with anything cold blued if he wanted to sell it to Bob.

I cannot imagine any dealer with a weeks worth of experience under his belt not being able to spot a blemish covered with cold blue the size of a 2 bit piece. And Garfield said it eloquently when he says the pistol is worth $1495.00 "but not to the seller". What a load of brass plated crap! I know some people worship certain dealers but remember those dealers didn't get rich in this business giving refunds to new collectors. Personally, I think they are crapping in their own Easter bonnet.

The Forum has and will continue to change the way many of us do business. I still believe that the best way to find Lugers is to ignore dishonest dealers and ferret out Vet Lugers. There are many left out there. Just my .02 cents worth. Jerry Burney

[Garfield]

Jerry:

God Bless You and Keep You! I wish I would have posted the quote, "but not to seller". But it wasn't me, it was Johhny Pepper. I really think that I thought that thought, tho.

Good Hunting,

[lugerholsterrepair]

Thanks Garfield, I get confused sometimes. I babble and drool too but that generally doesn't show up here. Sorry Johnny!!! Great quote! Jerry Burney

[John Sabato]

Garfield,

Thanks for the thoughtful (and thought provoking)response. You and I are closer in opinion than you might imagine... I don't think there is any question of dealer liability for an item that is less than advertised... My position (as already stated) is that if the terms of the sale, three days inspection, had expired for a full refund, then the buyer has no recourse, and no gripe if the dealer isn't in a generous mood.

For a dealer, IMHO, the cost in public relations is high... not a price I would pay if I were in the business (which I am not), but some do.

I guess the question that will probably remain unanswered would be that if the defect had been reported within the three days, would there have been a refund in full... probably yes, less the shipping because that would also be part of the sales agreement.

The only protections that long distance "transactors" (I made that word up) have are the terms of the agreement to do business. This is the price of not doing business face to face (via the internet of phone)... because, as Brad Simpson has previously related, there is nothing that prevents an unscrupulous buyer from ordering a specific gun, and then removing parts that match somthing he already has, and then returning the gun within the inspection period, claiming it was unsatisfactory...

Once again... Caveat Emptor & Caveat Vendor...

thanks...