Absolutely deplorable actions by a fellow forum member!
 

Just wanted to make aware to all a situation which is almost stranger than fiction.

A few days ago, on our BST, a listing for an Uzit T206 in an SGC 10 was offered for $1,000 by fellow member Blunder. I responded as soon as I saw the post, both in the thread as well as by email.

After a few days of discussions via email, I agreed to buy the card for $1300 from Jamie. He told me that if I was willing to commit, and wait "2 weeks", that we had a deal.

I responded that I had no problem waiting as long as I was guaranteed the card....he did so, and we had a "deal".

Today, it was discovered that Jamie does not even own the card....in fact, its in a live auction with Heritage currently with 19 days left!

In other words, Jamie was looking for an "auction partner" but didnt want to disclose this fact. Instead, he wanted to "pre-sell" a card he did not own, under the false pretense that he had already bought the card and was simply waiting for delivery.

When I sent my last email to Jamie (after discovering this scam), he responded with wanting to know what the big deal was since I was willing to wait the 2 weeks anyway. The "big deal" Jamie, is that we agreed to my financial commitment of $1300 under the terms that I was GUARANTEED to have the card at the end of 2 weeks. Not that I MIGHT get the card in 2 weeks. Furthermore, you lied to me basically via ommission. Very deceptive practice Jamie. You wanted to use me as an auction partner without me knowing. What happens at the end of the auction and you were not high bidder? Then you email me with some bullshit on why I wont be getting the card you promised me even though I tied up my money for you?

Here's a link to the thread for those interested in a blow-by-blow account:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=122287

Sounds to me like it is your card for $1300 regardless of what he ends up paying for it. He is gambling...as long he delivers than no harm. Time will tell what type of man he is. His reputation is officially on the line.

I can also publicly post the entire transcript of emails that Jamie and I have had if anyone is interested. This kind of activity is completely inexcusable!!!

Here's what he wrote to me when I asked....

"I'm looking for someone that wants to buy this card because I have to buy it along with another card for sale which is the one I want. They are being sold as a pair. And I want to find someone interested in the uzit jennings so I only end up with the card I want and not paying for both. The high guy right now is at 1300. I will send picks if your still interested.
Jamie "

I'm not sure that "for sale" is really how you would categorize an auction item that you aren't guaranteed to win....

With one tiny problem.....what if he didnt even win the auction? Then I tied up my cash on the premise that if I waited 2 weeks, the card would be delivered to me. If he gets outbid, then what? Thats why FULL DISCLOSURE is absolutely needed in this situation!

Somehow I don't think that a guy who would do something as pathetic and petty as this gives a rat's ass what his reputation is on an internet chat board.

That's just it. He HAS to win! Not a smart way to do business in my opinion. If you get the card...great. If you don't...awful. No matter what, stay away from him in the future.

He is seeing wheretheyaint.com and raising them one.

Exactly. Regardless of whether he wins the auction, his actions are dishonest and probably illegal. Taking money for a card of which he doesn't own?

That listing was sketchy from the outset, but any thread that spawns "UZIT or lose it" can't be all bad.

easy decision
 

Just a quick note to say the other mods and I are in discussion about this. We would like to see if Jamie wants to respond in this thread to these accusations? If he does and he convinces us that everything is just fine, then so be it. If he does nothing then we will make the same call as if he is just outright guilty of what is being said. So, here is your chance if you would like to explain, Jamie? best regards

Let me clarify here that Jamie DID tell me to wait 2 weeks to make payment on the card. He told me to "wait until he gets it". However, he stated nowhere in our dozen+ emails that the card was in an auction. He DID however "guarantee" that I would own the Uzit in 2 weeks time, leading me to believe that he was either waiting for delivery, or in negotiations on a private deal. I just fail to understand how one can guarantee someone else a card when its currently in a major auction!

Leon, I will happily supply you with a complete, unedited list of our emails back and forth if that helps in making your decision. If fact, I have no problem in displaying them in this thread publicly so that Jamie may see they are legit. Just let me know if you need them.

I don't understand why Jamie would go this route as opposed to just trying to find a partner for the auction. Judging by the flurry of posts after his listing he would have had his choice of partners. Doesn't make any sense.

actually
 

Actually it's kind of a ballsy :) move. Unfortunately it's as was already said, if it is as it looks, it's at least unethical and at worst criminal. The lawyers would know better than me. I "guess" if he came through with the goods, it might not be criminal, as he fullfilled his part of the contract? .....

This is ridiculous. I have been looking for a Uzit for awhile and was excited to his post. I emailed him requesting a scan. He said he would send one later that night, which he never did and he raised his asking price $200. I told him I was still interested but have yet to get a further response. Now I see why...:mad:

Take it easy Jamie.
Bob

private emails on the board
 

While private emails aren't generally allowed on the board I think that in very rare cases we might let one or two go, if need be. I don't think it's needed in this case, at least yet. If we don't hear from Jamie by tomorrow then the other mods and I will take some form of action, with respect to him being on the board. regards

To be fair to Jamie, I heard he has "been busy as hell with quarter end for work," so you might not hear from him right away.

If the card was originally offered at $1000, just curious why you agreed upon $1300? What was his justification in raising the price $300? That should have told you about his character right there.

So...money hasn't been exchanged yet, correct? What if the card is delivered as promised? I agree with everyone that this is not the right way to do things. I do not know who the person in question is...but he is being exposed and that is good for the rest of us. I would like to see the finish.

I actually offered the extra $300 to ensure my chances of getting the card. I think $1300 is a very fair price to pay for an Uzit in a grade of 1, and was happy to offer that amount.

http://sports.ha.com/common/view_ite...7&Lot_No=81043

I get that he wants the Seymour for his backs set that he has displayed before, but what happens if the Jennings and Seymour sell for $4000? Is he charging $1300 for the Jennings and paying $2700 on his own for the Seymour? Sounds like a serious gamble. I wouldve given the benefit of the doubt if he was upfront about it, but he clearly withheld information to me and chicagoT206, as well as others I'd assume...

Anyone want to buy a T206 Wagner from me in a month? :D:D

If everything is upfront and transparent I have no problem with what he did. It is just short selling, but with baseball cards. No matter what, he has to come up with that card, so all the risk is on him.

That doesn't make sense. What do you mean "ensure my chances of getting the card?" Was the card for sale to the highest offer or was the card for sale for $1000? I just don't understand why you would offer an extra $300 if he already had an asking price. I have never offered a seller more than their asking price to "ensure I get the card." If the card is for sale then that is the price. Something smells fishy!

Thats just the point JP. Nowhere in all of our many emails does he say hes bidding on anything. How in the world can he sell me a card, AND guarantee our deal if its in auction. If he was negotiating with a private seller, and needed backing on the $1300, but was SURE to get the cards, im fine with that, and I dont mind waiting the 2 weeks. But to tell me im locked in on the Uzit, and that I will get it in 2 weeks is pure deception. He wants me to lock down my financial commitment IN CASE he happens to win an auction 19 days from now? Without telling me such?? Get real Jamie!

Sort of...except he hid that he didn't own the card. And what recourse is there if he doesn't win? It looks like he put himself in a position that he could ONLY benefit from and had a good chance of failing for the other party.

Have you ever been house shopping before? My wife and I looked at a house about 4 years ago that we loved. Asking price was $194,500. We made our offer at full asking price that same weekend through our real estate agent. We found out that Monday that we lost the bid to another couple who offered $199,000 the same day. Same concept here. If a person offers an item for sale that you know is a popular item for a fairly low price, theres no harm in making an offer of above that asking price to help ensure you get the item. Whats so "fishy" about that?

This is exactly correct. I could "sell" any card in that auction on the BST, and then place a bid of 20% less than what I agreed to sell it to you for. And if I dont win the auction, I just come back to you and say "oooops, sorry". That is the very definition of a SCAM!

Sounds like most people get that what Jamie did was wrong...but before he is completely ostracized, like Leon said, we should let him explain himself.

He has not been too busy to email me exactly 12 times on this subject since 11:41am just today. He has also not been too busy to edit his BST post today, as well as respond that a "deal" had been made on the card. My guess is that he just needs to figure out a good enough excuse for his actions before he shows up here.

This is a card, not a house. It was for sell at a certain price. Yes, there could be harm in making an offer of above the asking price. Let's say there was another individual before you that wanted the card at the $1000 asking price and the two agreed to a deal. Then you come along and offer $300 more. The seller already sounds a bit shady, so sure he is going to take the extra $300 after he already had a deal. I am not saying that happened, but I can't think of too many reasons why somebody would offer more than the seller's asking price.

Surely you asked him in your initial email if the card was still for sale? If he said no and you offered $300 more to take it away from another buyer, then it sounds like you got what you deserved. I hope that is not the case. If he said yes that it was still for sale, then I just don't see why you would offer $300 more.

Am I the only one that finds it odd that someone would offer a seller 30% more than their asking price on a baseball card? After all, it was a fixed price ($1000) post, not a "best offer" post.

Yes, I did ask if the card was still available, and he said it was. It was at that point that I offered what I was comfortable in paying, the $1300. He did NOT have any deal in place (at least he didnt tell me he did), so I didnt really "trump" anyone out of the card. I just tried to make his decision a bit easier.:D Is it against any forum rules to overpay for a baseball card? Are you my financial advisor who determines what is in my best interests regarding my financial health? And lastly, was it you or was it me who went to work for the past 11 years and earned the money in which I was willing to spend? In these regards, I dont see how my offer was "unfair" in any way, shape or form. Does anyone else?

I agree. I'd like to hear what Jamie has to say first...2 sides to every story. Let the guy at least try to explain himself before hanging him...

Also, This is the Internet. A bunch of invisable dealers. Love it or hate it...without the web, I wouldn't have the cards I own. The local dealer where I live does not sell pre-war cards. The web is the only way to obtain what I (e'hem) need. I have not been stung yet...but won't be surprised when it happens. Our only protection from fraud (or shady deals) is word of mouth. I commend the thread starter. Though I probably would have waited until the goods were NOT delivered before posting.

Love the avatar, Eric.

Sounds to me like Blunder made a blunder! :) in all seriousness, I would not have done something like this. Seems risky an unethical, and like some would say possibly criminal.

I would not use "criminal" until $ is/was exchanged. It sounds like the seller asked for 2 weeks to deliver. The buyer agreed...so time will tell.

Chicago, did he agree with the $1300 you offered, or is the accepted offer some imaginary person that won't be able to sue when he doesn't win?

No, I am not your financial adviser, but let me give you a little financial advice anyway. When somebody has something for sale that you are wanting to buy and they tell you their asking price rather than saying, "make me an offer," then there is no need to offer any additional money.

If you would have seen this card in a dealer's showcase at a show with $1000 price tag, would you ask him, "Will you take $1300 for it? " No. That's stupid. There was no need to offer any additional amount of money of you were indeed the first buyer.

You're starting to contradict yourself, so you should really be careful. In your first post you said...

But above you said...

So which is it? Did you make him the offer at the point you asked him if it were still for sale, or did you make him the offer after a few days of discussions?

It is only my opinion (and if I am wrong I will apologize), but I think the card was already sold to another buyer and you offered $300 more than the asking price to (in your own words) “ensure your chances of getting the card.” If that is the case, that is pretty deplorable in itself. If that is not the case, then you will receive an apology.

I'll reserve any more posts until I hear from the other party.

He told me the card was mine for $1300 if I was willing to wait 2 weeks. I said that I didnt mind waiting 2 weeks as long as the card was guaranteed to be mine at that time. He said it would be mine and then accepted my offer of $1300. An hour or 2 later is when I discovered the scam on the BST thread (I was watching it to see if he would publicly state the card was no longer available).

Right....but in the B/S/T, Jamie changed his post to read "No longer looking for a buyer on the card.. thanks for your interest." Is that because you have an agreement with him still in place, or is it someone else, or is it no one else?

Thanks for the legal advice.

Here is the exact timeline for the emails.

3/31---I send email requesting scans...no response.
4/2 ----I send 2nd request for scans
4/2---I get 1st response...tells me he is busy, card is still available and will talk to me later
4/2---I tell seller i'll pay $1300 for the card
4/3---Seller tells me he has much interest in the card and will forward scans to me
4/3---I tell seller my offer of $1300 is good till Monday as there is another card im thinking of buying
4/3---Seller tells me the card is mine at $1300.


Now you can turn this anyway you want, but these are the facts. By my count, thats 4 days worth of "negotiations". My initial request was simply for scans. I made my offer on day 3 of the negotiations, and to the best of my knowlege, the card was not yet "sold". Had it been sold, I seriously doubt that we would have gone through the rest of this "dance". You can be upset with me because my pockets may be a bit deeper than yours, I cant control that. Im willing to overpay for cards that I really want, and theres nothing unethical about that. But I can understand why you may be pissed about that, especially if you would like to buy a card at the lowest price possible. I dont concern myself too much on price, that extra $300 means very little to me....thats basically a sour 20 minute run at the blackjack table.

You should use that in court Jeff. :D

When is the due date? I can't believe a pending deal is getting this much attention.

I am looking for a Walter Johnson portrait (3,4 or 5). I will take it today, tomorrow or this May...as long as I get it.

Please PM me.

Thanks

Pat

He changed that post just minutes before I became aware of what was really going on. I immediately emailed him stating my anger over what he was trying so deceptively to do, and ended our agreement. I wouldnt buy 25 cents worth of popcorn from him if I was starving to death.

Sweet!!! So attempting to commit a crime is no longer a crime? At least that should solve our prison overpopulation problem...

Anybody want to buy one of the "It ain't fraud til you're caught!" t-shirts I'm having printed up?

Somehow you are missing whats really going on here. You say you want a Johnson in a 3, right? Ok. Lets say I PM you saying i'll sell you one for $1,000, but you have to wait 2 weeks before I can deliver it. You say "deal". Then I go on an auction site and bid on a PSA 3 Johnson with a max bid of $700. If I win it, I just pocketed an easy $300. If I DONT win it, I email you saying what? "Sorry, but I changed my mind"? Do you now see how this is unethical? I get a free chance at making a profit from you while you tie up your $1,000 and expect to own a Johnson in a 3? In those 2 weeks that you are waiting, you notice a Johnson in a 3 for sale at $750, but you dont buy it cuz you already made a deal with me, right? But you dont even know that you might not even get your $1,000 Johnson. What kind of deal is that???

I don't understand.

For some reason the buyer was OK with the 2 week lag. It doesn't take me 2 weeks to put a card into an envelope.

Not attacking...but red flags were thrown from the beginning of this deal.

As far as I am concerened...the seller has 2 weeks to produce. If that does not happpen...then we can continue with the (much desevered) bashing.

Blunder is online, so maybe we'll get an explanation soon...

I don't say deal.

i'm with scott on the question of why didn't jamie just ask for a buying partner for the lot?? and not make himself look like a scammer. he posts on here a lot,so he should be smart enough to know he is going to be criticized immensely for this type of (scam)

Im absolutely fine with that 2 week lag, as long as Im guaranteed to get that card after those 2 weeks are up. For example, lets say the seller had a deal in place with another forum member who happened to be on vacation. The deal was for 2 cards for $2600, but the guy wanted just to keep one. Now he needs to find a financial backer to buy the other one. So he lists on the BST that he has it for sale. Now he says to me that it will be 2 weeks till HE gets the card. Im fine with that....its a done deal. But dont tell me im getting the card in 2 weeks when its in an auction! There is no way he can guarantee that i'll be getting that card! Have you ever wanted to win an auction lot, but were outbid? Yeah, me too.:rolleyes:

Any way you slice it, it was going to be a hell of a lot more than 2 weeks. Auction closes in almost 20 days, then the time to get the funds to Heritage, and then get the items delivered....definitely at least the beginning of May.

That is a risk someone has to be willing to take by agreeing to give the seller two weeks to sell. I don't think that is an agreement that would be unethical or wrong, but the buyer would have to be assured in some other manner of the seller's intentions to sell. I would say that in a perfect world, if such a deal were to happen, the inability of the seller to sell the card after two weeks would result in the seller paying an agreed some of damages for breach of contract. The buyer would take on a calculated risk of agreeing to buy a card at some future date, with the insurance that if the seller fails to come through, the buyer will receive something in return. However, on the internet, such an agreement would never happen and it would be too burdensome to legally enforce.

this is absurd
 

I have read only the first 1.5 pages of this thread. I had no idea this was going on(this thread) I am out now and will respond when I am home after reading this through. Anyone who has dealt with me can vouche for my ethics...just ask jerry T after I came through with our BL460 deal. Chicago I don't know what you have told these people. I was not looking to do one criminal thing. I wanted to find an auction partner. Any one who I responded to past a "hello" which was only 2 people... I told I did not own the card... I agreed on a price with chicago and plan on bying the card. A bit of a gamble because I could get stuck paying for more then I wanted for the seymour. I in no way was going to take money from him. And I am outraged that this board feels that's who I am... I have been part of this board for years...

If I advertised the card on the bst in a method not allowed then I am sorry for that.

Chicago you are insane for trying to make me out to be a criminal....

I will respond more when I have a chance to finish reading this thread.

Jamie

Interesting to see that Blunder is looking for a partner in the "REA Partnering" thread. Anybody interested?

Wow, you are really over thinking. I thought I was bad. Every time my wife pulls her car into the drive way I think...we could sell that for a nice Plank. I mean, after all...she is a school teacher and can take the school bus to work.

Anyway, It is obvious that you really want the card (ie...2 week waiting...$300 extra for insurance)...I can't argue your passion. I hope you get it.

And when you have time, a couple of other questions Jamie. First, until you were "exposed" in your BST thread, you NEVER once mentioned that the card was in a current auction....why not?
Second, you guaranteed I would get the card in 2 weeks if I made a financial commitment to you for the $1300. How do you guarantee me a card thats currently in an auction?
Third, Had you not won the auction in "2 weeks", what would you have told me at that point after you had me tie up my money for a card you guaranteed would be mine?

Chicago206, gecko109, Phil or whatever your name is, I am not "upset with you" or "pissed." I have no reason to be. I just know BS when I hear it. I also don't care how deep your pockets are, but it seems like you sure like to tell everybody how deep they are...

http://forums.collectors.com/message...ighlight_key=y

If your pockets are really that deep, then why are you slumming by looking at $194K houses when the median home price in Chicago is $238K?

I've dealt with Jamie in the past and had a good transaction. However, there is something that worries me about this, too - so feel I should speak up. I contacted Jamie last night (10:30pm) about the Uzit and asked for a scan. I received an email back almost immediately. The email I received stated as follows "top offer is 1300. Are you interested at 1400? If so I will send pic tomorrow." What worries me about this is if the card was already sold for $1300, what would have happened if I agreed to the transaction?

Again, my past dealings with Jamie have been good and I don't really want to be involved in a board fight (I'd rather stay out of it). However, I did not receive full disclosure that the cards was promised to someone else (however I did receive full disclosure that there was another buyer at $1300 so I could not fault Jamie there) and it sounds like the other potential buyer did not receive full disclosure (that his $1300 offer was the "floor.")

Jamie told me that I was "locked in" at $1300 and not to worry if he got an offer of $1400. Basically, the card was "sold" to me. This of course was BEFORE I had realized he was using me as leverage to bid on an auction lot!

Yes gecko, and somebody else was probably locked in at $1000 until your $1300 offer came along.

"If your pockets are really that deep, then why are you slumming by looking at $194K houses when the median home price in Chicago is $238K? "


Im not quite sure of your intent at embarassing me, perhaps Jamie is your buddy, but I digress. To answer your question, 4 years ago my wife and I had no kids, and we both enjoyed traveling as well as buying nice things (cars, gold/silver bullion, etc). The $194k house fit into our lifestyle very well at that time. It was a 2 bedroom ranch in a neighborhood full of city workers (im a Chicago firefighter). So it was safe, and large enough for us to be happy, yet the mortgage was small enough to allow us to do whatever we wanted to do...ie we wouldnt be "married to a mortgage". We ended up buying a bigger house not far from the one we wanted for $224k that was even nicer. The small difference in price didnt bother us, but in retrospect, its a good thing we didnt get the other one. My wife became pregnant with our son a few months after we closed on the home! We really appreciate the extra space now.

Blame the seller for that, if its true. I had no knowlege of the card being sold already...if in fact it even was, as you speculate. You have a serious hard on for me though. Im beginning to see that much.:cool:

I do not have deep pockets but will also overpay for cards that I really want.

Rawn

Likewise. However that is usually an auction style format. Sometimes we bid more than what we think the card may be worth to ensure that we win it when we know we are (or may be) in competition with others. A fixed price sale is totally different. The seller quotes his asking price and the buyer can either choose to purchase it or not. Until this day (and I've been collecting for 26 years) I have never heard of a buyer offer a seller 30% more (or any more) than his asking price on a card. It just doesn't make sense to me. In all my years of collecting I have never been at a show or in a shop and have a dealer quote me a price on a card and then turn around and offer him more than what he's asking. Am I missing something or is that just common practice?

Don't get me wrong, I'm with the buyer here and would hold the seller to the agreed price.

Rawn

2 threads in 2 weeks about 'BST problems' from the same guy. I've used it 100+ times in 6 years and have yet to have an issue with anyone. Either I'm lucky, or something else is the root cause.

This thread reminds me why my one year of moderating this forum was a lifetime's worth.


Bill

No problems with "BST" here either and no problems with ebay. Guess I'm one of the lucky few.

Rawn

I have paid more than the asking price IF....
 

this originally posted by vintagetopps collector
Likewise. However that is usually an auction style format. Sometimes we bid more than what we think the card may be worth to ensure that we win it when we know we are (or may be) in competition with others. A fixed price sale is totally different. The seller quotes his asking price and the buyer can either choose to purchase it or not. Until this day (and I've been collecting for 26 years) I have never heard of a buyer offer a seller 30% more (or any more) than his asking price on a card. It just doesn't make sense to me. In all my years of collecting I have never been at a show or in a shop and have a dealer quote me a price on a card and then turn around and offer him more than what he's asking. Am I missing something or is that just common practice?

.... IFthe seller has a price and it SEEMS like he may be shopping around for a better price, and IF I really want the card, then at times I have offered more than the asking price to "finalize" the transaction and have the seller commit to me at that point...it seems to me that while his price may have originally been $1000.00, it was almost like a "make a best offer " type situation...my 2 cents

The last 2-3 weeks haven't been fun.

Yeah, its all my fault on this one. Shame on me for not wanting to be used as leverage for another guy's bid in an auction without being told thats what it was. By the way, perhaps you missed my follow-up on the other BST topic....it was a PUBLIC APOLOGY. Either you missed it, or convienently failed to mention it in your above post.

Chicago, I think you are taking it wrong. It;s a reference to the drama on here and the morals of some that do business on the forum.

Rawn

My understanding of this situation is Jamie is auctioning a card to the highest bidder before he actually owns the card. His thinking is, the higher the price he gets for the Uzit, the more money he has towards the other card he wants. If I were Chicago206, I would outbid Jamie on the pair and sell him the one he wants. Or another member with 'deep pockets' could win the pair and put an end to this story. That would be funny!:D

Just looked at the heritage auction being mentioned. Certainly seems like there are quite a few Uzit cards up for bids -- plenty to go around.

As for the drama.... While I have my thoughts, I'd rather just stay out of it and hope for a reasonable resolution for both involved.

Best,
Scott

Jamie can feign innocence all he wants, but as you can read in the email he sent me (first or second page of this thread I believe) he purposefully omitted relevant information...like the fact it wasn't "for sale" but actually an auction. And he told me the high offer was $1300, indicating there was no deal in place, and that he'd roll over for any amount higher than that. All the way around he has been dishonest, an there is no suitable explanation that can explain that away.