From Psycho the Elf – My Own Christmas Neg

[systemagic]

I mentioned this guy in an earlier thread. Because a competitive bidder had withdrawn a higher bid prior to the auction’s conclusion he thought that I should withdraw a lower bid after the auction’s end.

I’ve just now realized that he’s a genuine clinical psychopath. I should have realized this sooner. He’s unable to tell right from wrong and, the kinder you treat him the more venomous he gets. Last week was horrific in trying to reason with him and I finally told him that he had all the pertinent data and I’d be blocking his vicious emails. Last night the time came to recover my FV fees and neg him. His retaliatory neg was libellous in claiming that I’m a shill. Apparently he’s unclear on the concept. I think another bidder would have to be the shill.

So now I’ve got this nice new red Christmas bauble of a neg dangling criminal allegations. It’s odd, I think, that swearing is grounds for eBay to remove a neg but making false criminal allegations isn’t. The falsehood of his allegation is readily available as Trust & Safety cleared me of shill involvement quite early on in this dispute. Moreover his claim that I’m a shill doesn’t even make sense.

I’d love to take him to task legally but, as a mere bronze level PS’er I’m sure that I couldn’t recover enough in a settlement to cover my legal fees. I don’t think that I’ll use the limited Square Trade $20 options to remove the libel either. I think I’ll wear it like a medal for having taken a blow for the eBay community. Heaven knows how many transactions he’s bullied his way through before I came along.

He now has 2 NPB strikes against him so that allows him very little room to get nasty again. In the meantime I’d strongly urge everyone to block him. He’s a frighteningly malevolent individual. He’s Scotsman54.

[deltone]

Sorry this happened to you. You know what is very odd about this guy? He has over 300 feedback (5 negs) and he's only left 4 or 5 feedback. How strange is that?

[shoplineca]

systemagic
Whether you sue him or not may not be important. What is important is the threat of litigation.

I have done this 3 times so far with 3 people who left me negs and all 3 paid their $20 to ST to have the neg they left me removed.

You might suggest that this matter will be turned over to legal counsel and see what happens.

Malcolm

[shoplineca]

Its amazing what you can learn about people by seeing what they buy.

The guy collects police items and Tweety Bird items. I thought with a FB of 330 he sold stuff but all he does is buy on eBay (at least with that eBay userid).

I bet that he has another userid and competes with you. Why dont you do a search for Tweety Bird stuff for sale by US Sellers and I bet you will see that some of what he recently bought he is now selling under a different id.

You may have a better chance of getting the neg removed if you can point that out to eBay that he is out to hurt your business.

Malcolm

[systemagic]

Malcolm,

With regards to the threat of litigation I seem to vaguely recall one of your successes in this area. Didn't you have an actual lawyer, or a legal letterhead, at your disposal or something? These are nice imposing assets to have. I'm not sure that I could convince this guy on my own because, from what little I know about psyhchotics, they're never wrong and the rest of the world is crazy. I'd love it if it worked however. Maybe I could design my own letterhead - "Shark, Shyster, and Shill, Attorneys at Law."
With regards to his selling on eBay, I don't know, it's possible. He probably has a sales outlet of some sort, however, because his first email to me asked if I had more than one available. Given that I don't I'm probably not really head-to-head competition.

Marty

[shoplineca]

Marty
I am a Business Consultant and had been working out of a Toronto Law Firm at the time so I was well known by the Partners and staff lawyers and their staff in general.

However I simply emailed the guy and cc'd the law firm.
I hadn't retained the firm to act for me and they didnt expect me to retain them for something like this however they were only too happy to oblige me by telling the guy that I had them on retainer.

I suppose it helps that I have worked out of about 5 law firms in Ottawa and Toronto either for the firm or for a client as well as being familiar with lawyers from about 30 other firms.

The main point is to advise the Buyer in the strongest words possible that what they have done is something which could be financially detrimental to your business and as such, they may be subject to having to reimburse cost, losses and future losses as a direct result of their cavalier action.

It was my advising these people of the seriousness of their actions that made them realize that what they did was improper. The fact that they called my lawyer reinforces that they knew they were in the wrong but wanted to see how far I was prepared to take the matter.

I suspect that I would have reached the same conclusion had I not cc'd a law firm.

Malcolm

[shoplineca]

Marty
I still say that this guy is using 2 userids, one for buying and one for selling and that may be your best attack on him if you can trace him back to his selling id.

Malcolm

[systemagic]

It's Dec 24th.

Merry Christmas Malcolm and to all the other thoughtfull PSer's here a Joyous Holiday Season!

Marty

[auctiondropnship]

Last night the time came to recover my FV fees and neg him


In the future just collect your FVF .....Negging leads to this situation

[auctiondropnship]

systemagic


Because a competitive bidder had withdrawn a higher bid prior to the auction’s conclusion he thought that I should withdraw a lower bid after the auction’s end

Did you tell the recent person that Negged you this vary thing above??

[systemagic]

Todd,
I only explained to him about the 3rd withdrawn bid about 20 times - over and over. I also asked Trust & Safety to explain it to him. At first he didn't believe me because his (buyer's) auction history isn't as detailed as a seller's and it just shows 2 bids total and, I guess, some vague reference to a bid withdrawal. A seller's history shows that it was a third bid, it's amount, and precise time of withdrawal. I sent him a copy of this 3 times. He's either unwilling, or unable, to tell right from wrong. He also feigns ignorance, but doesn't have to because he doesn't seem very bright. In the end I don't think that he's mentally stable. I don't know if he still understands about the 3rd withdrawn bid today - but it's not for lack of explaining it to him.

[systemagic]

It seems that Square Trade now solicits business via email each time that a neg is given.

I asked them to withdraw the neg on the grounds of libel. Usually it takes some sort of court edict to do so but I pointed out that Trust & Safety already absolved me of any shill involvment so the libel involved is already evident to eBay.

We'll see what, if anything, happens.

[auctiondropnship]

I think the problem , you may have ran into was explaining the situation too him as too what happend. If I had been emaield by the bidder asking why they were the hi bidder and what happened too the other bidder that was the highest. I would have emailed and commented that they retracked there bid.

I would have left it at that

[systemagic]

Todd,

I don't think he ever saw the third bid that was retracted and never inquired about it. In fact, he never believed, or indicated that he believed, that it existed. The second bidder first bid lower than Scotsman54, then bid higher, and withdrew the higher bid but not the lower. That left Scotsman54's bid elevated by the same bidder who had withdrawn his higher bid. Scotsman54, because of the way it showed up in his auction history, (2 bids total) refused to believe that there was a 3rd bid that was withdrawn and thought it should have been the first. He thought he had been wronged because his proxy bid remained elevated from its minimum by the party whose bid should have been withdrawn. The truth was explained to him repeatedly, despite his nasty demeanor, because he just didn't seem to be getting it. In the end it turned out that he just didn't want to get it and never will. More than just psychotic he may actually be clinically evil in accordance with Dr. M. Scott Peck's definative book on the subject titled "People of the Lie".

[auctiondropnship]

Ok I am confused , if the the bidder did not know about the situation??

Are you telling me you TOLD him about the situation .

He then got mad (Confused)....and then accused you of shilling

In a nut shell is this what happended

[systemagic]

The bidder was unclear about the situation - correct. I told him of the situation over and over - correct. He was angry an beligerant throughout - it didn't start at after his comprehension of the true circumstances. Rather his anger appeared to start when he thought that I wasn't getting his mistaken perception that there were only 2 bids. He didn't believe my repeated explanations that there were 3 bids. His accusation of shilling is not confusion - it's an intentional fabrication in retaliation for his neg. He knows that I have nothing to do with shilling.

It's a little hard to tell where he was coming from because he could have been feining both ignorance and anger. He appears to thrive on negative confrontation and is quite irrational. He's nowhere near normal.

This is what happened in his nutshell.