Thoughts on this Deal Gone Bad

[C. Davidson]

I agree with the majority here that the following quote, "both bezels in perfect condition" translates to coke and pepsi bezel inserts. A miscommunication indeed. Hopefully the deal is not dead as a new bezel (insert) only costs around $90. Best of luck on your business transaction.

[Gaijin]

What is the difference between a bezel and a bezel insert?

[C. Davidson]

Originally Posted by KansaiVet

What is the difference between a bezel and a bezel insert?

The bezel (assembly) is the metal base of the bezel. The bezel insert fits into the bezel (assembly) in a few color combinations (pepsi, coke, etc).

Cost of Bezel assembly= ? (at least a few hundred, $300+?)
Cost of Bezel insert= $90 ish

[shaggy]

im with the buyer on this one
i would have expected 2 bezels as well because thats what the ad says
i also dont think you should berate the buyer because he is inexperienced because he has clearly bought the seller before the watch and made a good choice as we can see by the fact that you have refunded him.

you missrepresented the sale although unintentionally and i cant see any reason to be angry with anyone but yourself

if the watch does not come back in the state it was sent then that is a different matter all together

just my opinion

[rajurama]

Originally Posted by Taffi Abernathy

This sounds like miscommunication, whereby you're boiling because you assumed this buyer knew your intent. Why would you assume he knew what was included if you didn't spell it out? While you are free to feel anyway you choose, I recommend you rethink the situation. You and he probably feel very much the same way, angry and misunderstood. Next time don't assume, spell out the details.

x2

[Rolex116520]

Originally Posted by kingkongkelley

When I read your ad, I assumed bezel insert. However, as others have said, I guess I can see what the buyer is saying--although getting two BEZELS with ANY watch would have been something I certainly would have asked about in phone conversations or emails.

Sorry it didn't work out for you. But you're a good guy for making the refund. I would do the same.

Same here , I would have understood inserts too . However legally you left the door open for misinterpretation . I do think the guy is anal or he knew exactly what he was doing and hoped you would let him keep the watch and reimboursed him the value of another bezel .
We learn every day , sure next time you will be more precise with the wording .

[buz-lh]

Thanks for the heads up changing my ad right now.

[Brushpup]

Ross,

I hate it for you but you did leave that door open unfortunately. I think most of us here would have asked the question to clarify but I tend to agree with our French friend above. The guy is being anal about it, and should have known for damn sure what he was doing. Just chalk it up to experience and move on. Life is too short to be angry my friend. Best of luck next time.

Patrick

[kkwn98]

Originally Posted by Rolex116520

I do think the guy is anal or he knew exactly what he was doing and hoped you would let him keep the watch and reimboursed him the value of another bezel .

Now that's just great... I hear he kicks kittens and puppies too...

Like many others here, I read the ad and I would have expected two bezels and not two bezel inserts.

Let's just assume all sorts of things about the buyer because he read exactly what was written and took the words on their face value. I mean, the nerve of the man; he should have looked behind the literal words and second guessed it all...

[LarryK]

Originally Posted by Rolex116520

Same here , I would have understood inserts too . However legally you left the door open for misinterpretation . I do think the guy is anal or he knew exactly what he was doing and hoped you would let him keep the watch and reimboursed him the value of another bezel .
We learn every day , sure next time you will be more precise with the wording .

BUT- whenever I buy or sell a watch, I itemize everything that is being included and what can be expected with it, including descriptions of the
books, tags, condition of the boxes, and any spare parts that might be included. You were definitely lax in your description (live and learn), but the buyer is equally at fault- If I were the buyer, I would have made 100% certain that I was getting a complete extra bezel, not just an insert.

I hope it works out for you in the best way possible
Regards!
LarryK

[2careless]

Offer him to take the whole shebang back and you relist it again.

[jdc]

I can see where the buyer is coming from, your ad reads as two bezels, I think most buyers would have asked clarification of this as it is unusual, but it sounds like a lack of communication between the two of you. Hope it works out

[kkwn98]

Originally Posted by LarryK

but the buyer is equally at fault- If I were the buyer, I would have made 100% certain that I was getting a complete extra bezel, not just an insert.

Thing is, you're not the buyer. You and others are imposing what you would have done, your knowledge and your values on the buyer. You say he's equally at fault - for simply reading and taking the literal words at their face value? For not thinking "hold on, he says it, but I don't think he actually means it"?

Have we now come to a point where someone who takes something at face value is also at fault? Wow. I mean, wow.

[dotcomakazee]

You can get a bezel insert on here all day for $100. Buy one or discount the watch $100. Problem solved. If he declines the offer then you know he just has buyer's remorse.

[springer]

I would have asked the seller to clarify what was included. Many sellers call bezel inserts "bezels."

[Idle Swede]

Originally Posted by dotcomakazee

You can get a bezel insert on here all day for $100. Buy one or discount the watch $100. Problem solved. If he declines the offer then you know he just has buyer's remorse.

?????????

[thecoinopcollector]

When I read it I assumed you meant inserts. Well that's a lesson learned for all of us.

[improviz]

Originally Posted by kkwn98

Now that's just great... I hear he kicks kittens and puppies too...

Like many others here, I read the ad and I would have expected two bezels and not two bezel inserts.

Let's just assume all sorts of things about the buyer because he read exactly what was written and took the words on their face value. I mean, the nerve of the man; he should have looked behind the literal words and second guessed it all...

Exactly. If you mean bezel inserts, state it; don't assume that the other guy is going to divine what you really meant when you mis-state something. Simple problem to solve: be specific. Onus is on the seller to be clear, not the buyer to interpret.

[improviz]

Originally Posted by kkwn98

Thing is, you're not the buyer. You and others are imposing what you would have done, your knowledge and your values on the buyer. You say he's equally at fault - for simply reading and taking the literal words at their face value? For not thinking "hold on, he says it, but I don't think he actually means it"?

Have we now come to a point where someone who takes something at face value is also at fault? Wow. I mean, wow.

Precisely. You cannot assume that someone with a few posts under his/her belt is a WIS. Assumption is the mother of all...you know.

[karmatp]

Originally Posted by thecoinopcollector

When I read it I assumed you meant inserts. Well that's a lesson learned for all of us.

X2 I figured you meant inserts also.

[Ed Rooney]

I would have assumed both bezels were included.

But i probably would have confirmed.

[smallcandle]

I too would have thought you meant bezel inserts. Too bad this deal went wrong.

[theloxmyth]

Originally Posted by jms_w

I'm sorry but I had to read this a few times to understand. It is definitely unreasonable to expect a watch with that price to include the 2 "bezels" versus 2 "bezel inserts". Bezels are expensive but the buyer is probably naive to that fact. I guess you've now learned that you can't assume that buyers are as knowledgeable as TRF members that would understand what you really meant.

X2!

You dun good, but you ought not to have had this refund situation arise at all.

The deal was a good value.

[Gob Bluth]

Thanks for all of the replies. Lesson learned. From here on out I will be sure to describe everything with painstaking detail so as to avoid any confusion. I still think the buyer should have asked for clarification. It also bothers me that he offered to keep the watch if I bought him a new bezel (which he said he found for $400). Give me a break. Either way, I haven't heard from him since I offered to refund his money (once I receive the watch).

[DadsWatch72]

I feel your intensions were honorable. I just hope the buyer isn't trying something fishy. I can see both views and its not too far fetched to see how this happened. GL

[esm]

sorry to see this event turned out this way....

imo - cant see why the buyer was at fault here.

apparently we are in a recession, and you see many people letting go of things "cheaply" often, so the buyer must thought you needed to sell the watch + accessories asap to cover your other expenses - which is fair enough assumption.

i'm sure the buyer would have checked your seller's rating to cover his/her own backside. theorefore he/she was happy to accept what was posted within the forum advertisment.

hope this will work out well for both parties and lesson learnt for both also. good luck.

[theloxmyth]

Originally Posted by Gob Bluth

Thanks for all of the replies. Lesson learned. From here on out I will be sure to describe everything with painstaking detail so as to avoid any confusion. I still think the buyer should have asked for clarification. It also bothers me that he offered to keep the watch if I bought him a new bezel (which he said he found for $400). Give me a break. Either way, I haven't heard from him since I offered to refund his money (once I receive the watch).

I MAY have seen your advert. for this piece and the picture clearly showed an insert.

Am I correct, Ross?

[omeglomania]

Hello All,
I'm the buyer in this transaction. I am new to the Rolex Forum. I learned of it from Ross(the seller) in his post to sell this watch in one of the two other main WIS forums both of which I am a member. My love of watches spans many years and I understand how transactions between strangers for items of significant value can be a tense and delicate propostion. Especially with all the fakes and scammers out there.
It might be considered naive for me to misinterpret what was actually written and perhaps I should have clarified what was offered before I entered into the transaction. I would think though that the assumption would be those who partake in these forums have a higher knowlege of watches and would not easily interchange the use of the different parts such as bezels and an inserts. Instead I assumed what was written was what was offered. Even more ironic is that the seller lists his occupation as attorney in his profile in another forum. One would also think that if anyone would appreciate the importance of exact wording, it would those who make their living in the specificity of language.
As soon as I received the watch and noticed the discrepancy I contacted Ross explaining the misunderstanding and offered three suggestions. He could procure the bezel and supply it to me, he could refund the mutually agreed upon cost of the bezel, or just refund the entire transaction. I also offered him the option of coming up with his own solution to the dilema.
He chose the refund which I respected and appreciated even though I had hoped we could find a solution in which I could keep the watch. I stressed that it was important that we were both satisfied with the outcome. My postion is that although the money is important, it is the trust and honor that we build in these transactions that ultimately hold the higher value.
My blood does not boil, however I would have hoped that Ross would have opened a private line of communication with me rather than using the energy to post his dissatisfaction in this public forum.
Ross, I will keep the watch. Even though what stated in your ad was not correct I know your intent was not to mislead. I would have been nice though if you would have offered the same consideration.

[kkwn98]

Originally Posted by omeglomania

Hello All,
I'm the buyer in this transaction. I am new to the Rolex Forum. I learned of it from Ross(the seller) in his post to sell this watch in one of the two other main WIS forums both of which I am a member. My love of watches spans many years and I understand how transactions between strangers for items of significant value can be a tense and delicate propostion. Especially with all the fakes and scammers out there.
It might be considered naive for me to misinterpret what was actually written and perhaps I should have clarified what was offered before I entered into the transaction. I would think though that the assumption would be those who partake in these forums have a higher knowlege of watches and would not easily interchange the use of the different parts such as bezels and an inserts. Instead I assumed what was written was what was offered. Even more ironic is that the seller lists his occupation as attorney in his profile in another forum. One would also think that if anyone would appreciate the importance of exact wording, it would those who make their living in the specificity of language.
As soon as I received the watch and noticed the discrepancy I contacted Ross explaining the misunderstanding and offered three suggestions. He could procure the bezel and supply it to me, he could refund the mutually agreed upon cost of the bezel, or just refund the entire transaction. I also offered him the option of coming up with his own solution to the dilema.
He chose the refund which I respected and appreciated even though I had hoped we could find a solution in which I could keep the watch. I stressed that it was important that we were both satisfied with the outcome. My postion is that although the money is important, it is the trust and honor that we build in these transactions that ultimately hold the higher value.
My blood does not boil, however I would have hoped that Ross would have opened a private line of communication with me rather than using the energy to post his dissatisfaction in this public forum.
Ross, I will keep the watch. Even though what stated in your ad was not correct I know your intent was not to mislead. I would have been nice though if you would have offered the same consideration.

Welcome to the forum.

According to some, you are equally at fault here. You should know better than to assume someone means what he writes. You really should look at all that's not written. In other words, you should have E.S.P.

Kidding aside, I think those who think you're equally at fault for having the temerity to look at just the literal, printed word, or might otherwise be dodgy, owe you an apology.

[Watchdog]

Originally Posted by omeglomania

Hello All,
I'm the buyer in this transaction. I am new to the Rolex Forum. I learned of it from Ross(the seller) in his post to sell this watch in one of the two other main WIS forums both of which I am a member. My love of watches spans many years and I understand how transactions between strangers for items of significant value can be a tense and delicate propostion. Especially with all the fakes and scammers out there.
It might be considered naive for me to misinterpret what was actually written and perhaps I should have clarified what was offered before I entered into the transaction. I would think though that the assumption would be those who partake in these forums have a higher knowlege of watches and would not easily interchange the use of the different parts such as bezels and an inserts. Instead I assumed what was written was what was offered. Even more ironic is that the seller lists his occupation as attorney in his profile in another forum. One would also think that if anyone would appreciate the importance of exact wording, it would those who make their living in the specificity of language.
As soon as I received the watch and noticed the discrepancy I contacted Ross explaining the misunderstanding and offered three suggestions. He could procure the bezel and supply it to me, he could refund the mutually agreed upon cost of the bezel, or just refund the entire transaction. I also offered him the option of coming up with his own solution to the dilema.
He chose the refund which I respected and appreciated even though I had hoped we could find a solution in which I could keep the watch. I stressed that it was important that we were both satisfied with the outcome. My postion is that although the money is important, it is the trust and honor that we build in these transactions that ultimately hold the higher value.
My blood does not boil, however I would have hoped that Ross would have opened a private line of communication with me rather than using the energy to post his dissatisfaction in this public forum.
Ross, I will keep the watch. Even though what stated in your ad was not correct I know your intent was not to mislead. I would have been nice though if you would have offered the same consideration.

A big welcome to the forum!


I hope you enjoy your time here.