What's new
Carbonite

South Africa's Top Online Tech Classifieds!
Register a free account today to become a member! (No Under 18's)
Home of C.U.D.

Items not supplied as advertised @||C0NFLiCT||

Status
Not open for further replies

HK-Kid

VIP
VIP Supporter
Rating - 100%
267   0   0
Joined
Jul 6, 2017
Messages
1,905
Reaction score
875
Points
5,755
Deal Thread URL: [Sale] - Pack of RGB Fans | Air Cooling
Seller:
@||C0NFLiCT||
Buyer:
@HK-Kid
Description of Bad Deal:

Hi all,

my first bad deal here so far. Not really happy to post here but I think this is the best solution, for a third party to assist.

So @||C0NFLiCT|| and myself agreed on the following deal: [Sale] - Pack of RGB Fans | Air Cooling

All went well and the Seller was very helpful, professional and provided awesome pricing! I was travelling a lot for work the past week and was not able to test the fans when they arrived on Thursday. I however returned home on Friday and opened the package, which was packaged very well I might add. I then noticed that the fans were the Coolermaster MF120L RGB fans and not the MF120R as advertised. I have been looking for these for a while as per my thread: [Wanted] - Cooler Master MasterFan MF120R RGB | Air Cooling .

I informed the Seller and mentioned that I already have a few ML120R's and wanted to match them. He provided me with an apology and an explanation that the fans were pretty much the same, the ML120R were for static pressure and the ML120L were for balance. To try and make the deal work I then said I would test the fans and see if they matched and would get back to him. I just tested the fans and they do not match the ML120R's. I also found that a number of the fans were very noisy (this seems to be a common issue or just the way the fans are as per reviews: MasterFan Lite MF120L RGB with Customizable Color Options by Cooler Master - Newegg.com ). I just informed the Seller and I was accused of damaging the fans and trying to pull a fast one as the fans are not what I wanted in the first place.... The logic displayed here was not up my alley and I asked that he just take them back and do a refund. The 140mm fans I actually did not test even though I did give feedback that they were fine as I was going to give those fans away to a relative.

Please assist.
 
Last edited:
Hi there,

It is sad to see a buyer lie about an items condition to swindle a threat of the bad deal thread, now listed.

I agree I had listed the fans model number in error, he is solely correct there and did apologise for it. The fans are roughly 5 months old and have invoices to prove that, secondly under my use not one of the fans made any audible noise even with fan controller software. I typically take note of things like that and return items defective for RMA. Sadly this users father thought it best to conjure up a lie such as this to bend my arm in taking them back purely because of the model number issue which he claimed was a small error during time of our chat.

The MF120L performs at the same RPM level basically of the R type and performs the same RGB effects per design, the only noticeable difference is the blades being that the R has a more curved design and the L slight curve.

Due to the user taking note of this error and not once requesting a refund or to return them and then making use of them has now sealed the deal on that story as the damages he has claimed could be a result of his usage habits or handling of the fans during installation. He is welcome to return them to the supplier for an RMA of which I can gladly supply the invoices to him for but I won't be taking back damaged goods that were in new like condition with no flaws or faults under my usage.

If I am to be listed as a bad dealer or banned from the forum, this will be accepted but the "voetstoets" rule applies here since taking note of the items and accepting them regardless, then making use of it under that knowledge. You can't expect the buyer to act now under these circumstances knowing what condition these items have suffered. First port of call was to return them after bringing up the error with me of which I would of have accepted the refund if there was a request which there wasn't and for the error which again I do apologise for, I didn't not recall their model numbers entirely and listed it wrongly, stuff like this happens and can be dealt with properly so that's the mistake I made and would of paid for but there you have it, two mistakes either party.

Thank you for the post but I stand by my word and justification of the items.

Final Notes:

# Just because a review site says they prone to coil whine, not every fan is like that and can manage without issue and thankfully they weren't for me using it in my Coolermaster TD500 case, so using this as an additional backbone to coax an extra vote on this wrongful justification is also of poor standing.

# For all I know he wants to send his faulty fans to me which may be of the same model to exhort money, I didn't send rocks in the packages. Who knows but I am very unimpressed with the character of this person.

# Always check the items before use, the seller or buyer can always make a mistake on details, even retailers, that's grounds for a refund, bad vote. Once you use it, its yours and all the defects per Voetstoets clause.I just wish this was handled better at the start where the error first got brought up.
 
Last edited:
@||C0NFLiCT|| and @HK-Kid can you please post the carb / or whatsapp chat for this thread.

In a nutshell the buyer bought the fans based on what was advertised, received something different.
He was willing to try them and found issues and you say he is lying ?

Confused, are we not seeing the lie? He said they were wrong per model but chose to use it and in doing so damaged them under his use or is lying about it being damaged which is more believable as he is trying to gain favor due to the fact that there isn't anything wrong about them and that the model error is his only quam really. He and I never agreed to a refund upon testing agreement. He took them as is and chose to use them despite knowing they were wrong per model instead of asking there and then to return them for a refund. I won't be pushed in a corner on this one. He chose to use them despite knowing the model number error and now has possibly damaged them under his use and I won't be subject to responsibility. He had a choice at the time and chose to use it, not ask for a refund as he received them also he didn't ask to test it and refund if there is a fault which there isn't but whose gonna side with a seller hey.

Let's await his screenshots of the chat, not edited copies.
 
Last edited:
Sorry was uploading the Whatsapp discussion but some private info was still there. Will re-post soon.
 
@||C0NFLiCT|| whether the items are faulty or not is besides the point. He was looking for a specific model which he didn't get. On that ground alone it is valid to get a refund. He was willing to give them a try and found them not to his liking. If they are faulty then you can send them back for warranty repair, the fact that you made a mistake with the models is not his fault and pawning the responsibility off on him because he gave them a try to see if they were basically the same is not right as he was trying to help you out. Everyone knows that there is a difference between static pressure fans and airflow fans, and just because they look similar doesn't mean they perform the same. Please sort out the refund.
 
@||C0NFLiCT|| whether the items are faulty or not is besides the point. He was looking for a specific model which he didn't get. On that ground alone it is valid to get a refund. He was willing to give them a try and found them not to his liking. If they are faulty then you can send them back for warranty repair, the fact that you made a mistake with the models is not his fault and pawning the responsibility off on him because he gave them a try to see if they were basically the same is not right as he was trying to help you out. Everyone knows that there is a difference between static pressure fans and airflow fans, and just because they look similar doesn't mean they perform the same. Please sort out the refund.

Respectfully I disagree with the biased post last sent as it makes the outcome a big deciding factor for a seller with clearly with no protection here, the condition outweighs the error of model details. It should most definitely not be my responsibility to send them back on false pretenses for replacements when there was nothing wrong with them to begin with, very poor stance there with that remark. An incorrect model reference with items received should of remained sealed, returned back if the user was indeed bothered by the details being in error, now its null in void as per damages. He had no issue to use them despite the model error per details and did so, now they're damaged under his care or use and now its the seller to blame because some how the model details hold more water than the items handling and losses therefor for me to enjoy as per the forum siding on that believing that's justified.

I must sadly decline the refund request on the grounds that the user made no remark to have them sent back prior to use nor did he state or we agree upon to have them tested then if faulty return for a refund. He chose to use them knowing their model details and subsequently damaged them while installing or using them, there is no way I can prove how it was done but it was clearly and thus cannot be made my responsibility on the basis of an already known detail, the model details. It is unfair to throw that weight on me despite the inconvenience of the incorrect details he received which is minor in comparison.
 
Last edited:
Respectfully I disagree with the biased post last sent as it makes the outcome a big deciding factor for a seller with clearly with no protection here, the condition outweighs the error of model details. It should most definitely not be my responsibility to send them back on false pretenses for replacements when there was nothing wrong with them to begin with, very poor stance there with that remark. An incorrect model reference with items received should of remained sealed, returned back if the user was indeed bothered by the details being in error, now its null in void as per damages. He had no issue to use them despite the model error per details and did so, now they're damaged under his care or use and now its the seller to blame because some how the model details hold more water than the items handling and losses therefor for me to enjoy as per the forum siding on that believing that's justified.

I must sadly decline the refund request on the grounds that the user made no remark to have them sent back prior to use nor did he state or we agree upon to have them tested then if faulty return for a refund. He chose to use them knowing their model details and subsequently damaged them while installing or using them, there is no way I can prove how it was done but it was clearly and thus cannot be made my responsibility on the basis of an already known detail, the model details. It is unfair to throw that weight on me despite the inconvenience of the incorrect details he received which is minor in comparison.

Trying to use big words is not going to impress me. I can use them too. You're trying to mask your bs behind them.

Fact: The model number difference is not a minor inconvenience. It's the difference in the design of the fans. If you bought an E class Mercedes but got a C class would you be ok with that? It's just one number after all. Also you guaranteed there would be no discernible difference between them, which you were incorrect with. You also didn't say he should not test the fans after he said he would (and this amounts to a tacit acceptance), in fact you said they would perform the same. You gave a warranty with those words that turned out to be incorrect. Onus remains on you here. In any breach of contract you cannot hold the other in breach if you are in breach first. You need to rectify your breach before they rectify theirs. By providing the incorrect item you were in breach first and he did not accept your answers in your conversations but said he would give it a try. This is a common aspect of second hand deals. You have no proof that the fans weren't faulty when you sent them so you can't say he hurt them either. You have the warranty information so you can handle the warranty return, and this onus is placed on you due to you being first at fault in this story.

@HK-Kid if he doesn't do the refund I'd suggest making a claim at small claims court. It's free to do.

@||C0NFLiCT|| your attitude stinks. If the refund isn't processed you will be permanently banned. Being a part of carbonite and the resulting deals is worth more than your over inflated sense of self importance that we see on display here.
 
Yes,agreed that the model number is not a minor thing but this was discussed & accepted by the buyer after apologizing & explaining the differences of the fans models. As per your Mercedes reference, I would return the car without using it if I received the wrong model and had no intention of using it indefinitely. I did not guarantee there would be no discernible difference which was also explained in detail to him, he then agreed to keep them & try them out not once stating that he would want to return them for a refund if he was not happy or checking with myself that this would be fine, he only made assumptions to this effect. I said they would perform the same as per RGB, Speed and Connectivity but did explain the differences between fan blade designs and their purpose.. These items were sold voetstoets so again no contract was entered into. If you look at my previous sales despite this sale with the incorrect item listing info, each time the buyer received great conditioned items and has always been happy with the items they have received from me.

Obviously the wrong assumptions were made and has now led to this outcome sadly. I don't appreciate being spoken to in this manner on the forum as a seller and that there is no recourse for the buyer who is in the wrong. I deal with clients on a daily basis and never had a bad outcome such as this one & this is also why I don't like dealing with secondhand items as there is no protection for the seller.

Not once has it been asked that he provide specs of his system or how he did the installation to see if something was done incorrectly or whether his system/case can handle running those fans without the possibility of vibration, only the whining noise he now claims they are making which they never did in the short time I had them.

The only way I will take them back is if i send them back to the supplier for an RMA so that they can confirm no recent damage has been caused from use, tampering or incorrect installation. If the supplier is happy that everything is in order & happy to refund me, I will then gladly refund to the buyer less shipping & handling fees of course, as this is what the supplier will charge me to do an RMA on the items as per their policy. If he can agree to this then we can move forward.
 
claim at small claims court. It's free to do.

As I stand to be corrected Ian, you pay a r1500 fee up front, that you possibly can get back on claim.
You also need to submit in the region where the person lives. (as in being a guy from Jozi having a payment conflict with a guy from East London needs to be lodged in East London)

Small claims is not that easy, someone drove into my car refusing to pay but a r1500 investment to maybe or maybe not get r5000, is annoying.

-----

"The only way I will take them back is if i send them back to the supplier for an RMA so that they can confirm no recent damage has been caused from use, tampering or incorrect installation. If the supplier is happy that everything is in order & happy to refund me, I will then gladly refund to the buyer less shipping & handling fees of course, as this is what the supplier will charge me to do an RMA on the items as per their policy. If he can agree to this then we can move forward."

What a p**s. unbelievable.
 
Last edited:
As I stand to be corrected Ian, you pay a r1500 fee up front, that you possibly can get back on claim.
You also need to submit in the region where the person lives. (as in being a guy from Jozi having a payment conflict with a guy from East London needs to be lodged in East London)

Small claims is not that easy, someone drove into my car refusing to pay but a r1500 investment to maybe or maybe not get r5000, is annoying.

-----

"The only way I will take them back is if i send them back to the supplier for an RMA so that they can confirm no recent damage has been caused from use, tampering or incorrect installation. If the supplier is happy that everything is in order & happy to refund me, I will then gladly refund to the buyer less shipping & handling fees of course, as this is what the supplier will charge me to do an RMA on the items as per their policy. If he can agree to this then we can move forward."

What a p**s. unbelievable.

Small Claims are free for claims up to R15 000
 
As I stand to be corrected Ian, you pay a r1500 fee up front, that you possibly can get back on claim.
You also need to submit in the region where the person lives. (as in being a guy from Jozi having a payment conflict with a guy from East London needs to be lodged in East London)

Small claims is not that easy, someone drove into my car refusing to pay but a r1500 investment to maybe or maybe not get r5000, is annoying.

-----

"The only way I will take them back is if i send them back to the supplier for an RMA so that they can confirm no recent damage has been caused from use, tampering or incorrect installation. If the supplier is happy that everything is in order & happy to refund me, I will then gladly refund to the buyer less shipping & handling fees of course, as this is what the supplier will charge me to do an RMA on the items as per their policy. If he can agree to this then we can move forward."

What a p**s. unbelievable.

Thanks for breaking this down.Sounds too stressing, don't need the hassle right now. Some Carbies have already expressed interest in the fans so will see how it goes....
 
As I stand to be corrected Ian, you pay a r1500 fee up front, that you possibly can get back on claim.
You also need to submit in the region where the person lives. (as in being a guy from Jozi having a payment conflict with a guy from East London needs to be lodged in East London)

Small claims is not that easy, someone drove into my car refusing to pay but a r1500 investment to maybe or maybe not get r5000, is annoying.

-----

"The only way I will take them back is if i send them back to the supplier for an RMA so that they can confirm no recent damage has been caused from use, tampering or incorrect installation. If the supplier is happy that everything is in order & happy to refund me, I will then gladly refund to the buyer less shipping & handling fees of course, as this is what the supplier will charge me to do an RMA on the items as per their policy. If he can agree to this then we can move forward."

What a p**s. unbelievable.
Nope its free except for the cost of service... Who told you about the R1500 deposit. I know its been awhile since I was asked to be a SCC Commissioner(its a volunteer post) but I dont think that part has change.
 
Nope its free except for the cost of service... Who told you about the R1500 deposit. I know its been awhile since I was asked to be a SCC Commissioner(its a volunteer post) but I dont think that part has change.

Legal assistants and clerks of the Small Claims Courts will assist you for free
 
Nope its free except for the cost of service... Who told you about the R1500 deposit. I know its been awhile since I was asked to be a SCC Commissioner(its a volunteer post) but I dont think that part has change.

My mate just did a claim, scc was free, but r1500 for sherrif to execute a warrant.

He also told me it needs to be submitted in the region the person lives, is that correct? The accident happened in joburg and I send him a letter of demand in april with no reaction
 
Status
Not open for further replies

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom