Superspeed Not as Described on Classifieds

[sfong33]

If the set I received had heads that were in similar condition to the ones in your pics I would have kept them. The best way to describe the set I received is bag clatter wear. Not the type of wear that is normal when an item is new or even swung a few hundred times.

[blackngold_blood]

I only have 1 comment. The seller admits to saying return for a full refund. To me that includes return shipping. Case closed in my book.

[GoIrish17]

So, he pays shipping there, and then if the buyer isn’t happy, he pays shipping back? What is this, Amazon? That’s absurd. There are major retailers who won’t offer return shipping and will charge 10% for restocking. Oh, but here on the BST, the full retail experience (and then some) is the expectation... without all that retail cost.

[blackngold_blood]

You are correct there are retailers that do this. You can call it the buyer being unhappy or whatever you want but he didn't get the item as described. Why should the buyer be out money when it is the sellers mistake on the description? I will always pay return shipping if the mistake is mine. The seller stated return for a full refund and to me that means return shipping as well. Should the buyer have spoke up as soon as he got the refund? Absolutely and that muddies the waters so to speak but the expectation should still remain to receive what you paid for.

A mistaken seller (whether intentional or unintentional) should not break even while the buyer loses money.

[dcfball88]

If you accept the premise that he misrepresented or was deceptive in his ad, then heck yes he does pay return shipping. And furthermore, you build shipping into the price as the seller (or you accept the ship-to cost of doing business). And the goods and services fee and insurance get built in too, right? Isn’t that what you all state on here often? So no, he doesn’t “pay” shipping there. If you didn’t build shipping-to in (or just accept it as a cost of doing business) then that’s on you. Don’t be deceptive and you won’t have to worry about being on the hook for return shipping.

I don’t think the “full retail experience” is the expectation, I think receiving an item as it was described is the expectation. No?

[GoIrish17]

The seller agreeing to a refund isn't some mea culpa, he was just trying to make a p.i.t.a. buyer go away as easily and painlessly as possible. Now he has to pay shipping BOTH ways, because his buyer seems to equate buying secondhand online from strangers to that of a retail experience? The buyer was more than welcome to ask for better photos if he was so worried about these sticks being jewels. Let's not excuse the buyer from any responsibility, especially since I have to assume this isn't the first time in life he has been disappointed, considering his high standards.

[GoIrish17]

Buyers are more than welcome to ask for more photos, especially if they are very sensitive to condition (as this buyer apparently is). Why should the responsibility of something so subjective as condition fall solely on the seller?

 

There being no feedback makes these conversations frustrating. I feel like there's a lot of folks chiming in here who have little to no experience on the BST and are incorrectly using their retail experience as a basis for their opinions.

[blackngold_blood]

I agree we need feedback restored soon. I have no retail experience and have been buying and selling on here for years.

I said that the buyer should have spoke up as soon as he got the refund and it didn't cover the return shipping. Waiting as long as he did was a mistake but that doesn't take away the fact that he is out money with nothing to show for it.

As far as shipping goes, it is in the price that is agreed upon. As a seller it is my job to do everything in my power (whether describing or packaging) to provide what I say I am providing when we agree on a deal. It is on me to get the buyer what I say I will in the condition I say it is. Pictures are Paramount in this. If the buyer does not get what I show and say, then it is on me to make sure the buyer is made whole. Not whole minus the return shipping fees so I break even. If you agree to sell something to someone, you as the seller take the risk not the buyer. It is the reason for item not as described with PayPal. Do some buyers use it egregiously? Sure. That doesn't mean all buyers do.

[raywutang]

If a retailer misrepresented a set of goods intentional or not, then they should fit the shipping bill back, that is a given in this day and age. Given all the facts and the original listing, it is clear in my eyes that the seller should refund the shipping back. If the seller had originally posted the detailed pics and gave a more accurate representation of the sticks other than "never used and in original box", then OP would be SOL, but not the case here.

[GoIrish17]

Then we agree to disagree. There used to be a different vibe on the BST, feedback or no. It's pretty much useless to me anymore, because of what we see here. Too many people think of it as a store.

[HuskyFan]

Anyone want to pool together funds to refund OP his return shipping costs so he can close this ridiculous thread? OP probably got a good deal on this and it is unreasonable to expect "new" when Seller never stated new. And don't get me started on whether "never used" equals "new." OP - if you want new, use your stimulus check to buy it at retail. Here's a link: https://superspeedgolf.com/collections/all-products

[ckay]

I can’t wait for a DnD thread about casting flash on a club head that wasn’t disclosed.

 

[Skhacker]

This is pure gold. I thought I had a sh***y day working 16 hours but this thread puts things into perspective.

[blackngold_blood]

I definitely agree things have changed on the bst and not for the better.

As far as this thread goes, I have no problem seeing your side, it just isn’t how I would do things. We both gave our opinion on it as peers not judge and jury. I wouldn’t hesitate to do business with the seller or the buyer but perhaps a little due diligence on both ends could have avoided this situation.

[awtryau89]

I still cannot wrap my head around this. If the buyer paid anything less than full price for these, then please just go away.

[larryd3]

I'm in. How much is return shipping? OP, what's your paypal so we can all send you some $$ ?

[larciel]

lol you guys are too funny!

 

[Krt22]

I will send him some cash, but only if he sends me a self addressed flat rate priority envelope! No other way!

[e-man]

I have been following this thread, but hesitant to respond for fear of receiving email notifications for weeks to come.

I have just one question for the seller. Did you buy this new? You must have, right? Because if you didn’t buy it new, you couldn’t represent it as “never used” because you would have know way of knowing whether the previous owner used it.

I have no horse in the race, but it seems to me that’s the key question. Yes or no, did you buy this item new, whether from the manufacturer or from a third party representing it as new?

[jimbonecrusher]

What a minute, you bought a swingspeed system, which is not meant to hit golfballs but only as a swing speed development tool, and you are upset that it might have been scuffed/marred/dinged/scratched? Was it somehow not going to perform the intended purpose for which you bought it?

How many times have you ever bought a club, ball, bag, shoes, clothing, etc. and there be a slight problem with the item?

If you bought it and you got completely ripped off, then you have a case. This isn't the case and you seem to be complaining about a non-issue.

Wouldn't the equipment been worn in any form or fashion from your use?

[e-man]

Guys, that’s not the point. Why are we defending someone who used the terminology “never used” if, in fact, it was used? Because it doesn’t matter if the thing has a few dings or scuffs on it because it won’t affect performance so we’ll excuse the misrepresentation?

[stagolfer06]

Yes, they were bought new. They sat in my living room in a box for a month. If I can dig up the original Facebook Marketplace ad, I will post it here.

[t4t3r]

Facebook marketplace is not a retailer. Ignorance isn’t an excuse to misrepresent an item. Just because you assumed they were new doesn’t mean they were, so passing that along to someone else is the whole point. Not implying that you did it purposefully but it’s your responsibility as the seller to accurately represent an item regardless of the history of said item.

[straightshot7]

"never used" may be a lazy description but if it were that important to me that the set be BRAND NEW, I think I would have asked for clarification. It sounds like this set may in fact be "never used" but with shop wear.

And, if the price was good on these (significantly lower than retail) I don't think I would care whatsoever if they showed minor/irrelevant marks.

Seems like a case of buyer's remorse more than anything else.

Asking to be refunded for return shipping 10-20 days later is just excessive. Just move on.

There is inherently some risk involved when buying online and buying from private parties. Expecting the seller to pay for return shipping is unfair, unless they have made an egregious error. I don't think this qualifies.

[SubaruWRX]

Shady description in ad plus buyers remorse and they end up here...

[sfong33]

OK, let’s assume that “light shop wear” is acceptable and that return shipping is not covered unless requested before sending the item back. Let’s also assume I had buyer’s remorse (for whatever reason), had unrealistic expectations and was just a pain in the a#@. Assuming all of the aforementioned, how do you reconcile the following statement by the seller in post #2 stating “I received the item back and there were no marks scratches, scuffs or use marks on the superspeed system” with the change in the items condition when it was reposted?

From Post #2:

Let me get on the front end of this, the superspeed system was never used, period. The buyer received the item, and right away said it has been used can I send it back; I gladly accepted. I received the item back and there were no marks scratches, scuffs or use marks on the superspeed system. 

I will admit I did not read the BST rules clear enough, I should have waited the 30 days to repost them. 

The original buyer is now asking for shipping refund, which should have been done beforehand not 10 days later.

[sfong33]

I paid $130, return shipping was a little over $20.

[jj9000]

I have a set of Superspeed sticks that I wouldn't sell you if you offered me $2K for them.

Why? Because you'd get buyer's remorse the minute you got them, and open a thread because the green/blue/red paint wasn't the exact same hue as what's shown on the SuperSpeed site.

Retail is that way ------------------>

[GoIrish17]

So you paid $70 less than retail and expected brand new? Gotcha. My opinion is this is petty and you need to move on. You got a great deal on the sticks, but couldn't get past a couple superficial scratches, which is why some are questioning whether or not this is just buyer's remorse. That you are hung up on his description in his relisting changing, and you had a "Gotcha!" moment catching him posting the item too soon, just add to the pettiness. Have you ever sold here before (not eBay or Craigslist or Facebook or whatever)? Because this is the situation that makes regular sellers cringe, and the reason why some really good sellers have moved along.

[sfong33]

I opened the thread because there was no way I could find a way to leave feedback. I contacted a moderator and he suggested this course of action.