How do I legally enforce my rights in a private sale ?

ED E

guil wrote: »

Sheena has stated before that Vodafone don't blacklist phones that were got on a contract not honoured.

I'm skeptical that its true. And even if it is, Insurance companies will for sure.

masculinist

coylemj wrote: »

OP, have you tried a Vodafone sim in that phone? If it works then it's a contractual matter as the phone is still locked to Vodafone. If it doesn't then it is blacklisted which means it was probably stolen.

It already had a vodafone sim in it . No sim worked. The Gardai told me its blacklisted but not reported stolen. They would not take it off me. It was for sale for a long time too. More than enough time for a hypothetical third party owner to report it stolen.

gctest50

masculinist wrote: »

It already had a vodafone sim in it . No sim worked. The Gardai told me its blacklisted but not reported stolen. They would not take it off me. It was for sale for a long time too. More than enough time for a hypothetical third party owner to report it stolen.

All he has to do is say he had 2 or 3 phones for sale and you opted for the blacklisted/locked one .....then when you failed to unblock it you came back shouting the place down

masculinist wrote: »

One thing is definite. If I dont get repaid , I will consider putting this guy on YouTube and writing a letter to all of his neighbours.
.

Send letters to his neighbours ? You'll end up in court

You've no proof of anything

masculinist wrote: »

An adverts.ie seller with 200 positive rep and no negatives

lawred2

What would be in the letter to his neighbors?

Winterlong

OP, it looks like the legal route is not an option for you here. But sending letters to his neighbours and putting some video on youtube will not achieve anything. Trying to embarrass someone like that will not work.

It sucks getting ripped off but apart from leaving a bad review and reporting him to adverts there is not much else you can do. Best advice really is to move on.

guil

ED E wrote: »

I'm skeptical that its true. And even if it is, Insurance companies will for sure.

I know for a fact it's true. I had a contract for 2 phones with Vodafone about 1.5 years ago that I couldn't pay. Neither phone was blacklisted and both were used until September gone.

masculinist

gctest50 wrote: »

All he has to do is say he had 2 or 3 phones for sale and you opted for the blacklisted/locked one .....then when you failed to unblock it you came back shouting the place down

Nope. Why would I shout the place down. I merely arrived bringing my masculinist energy. Not everyone is a limp wristed millennial thankfully. Theres a clear record of which phone I agreed to buy and that phone was the only one for sale in his profile . And it was taken off when it was sold to me. And the phone is advertised as only needing ''unlocking costing ten euro'' . The degenerate even writes a spiel in the ad about how ''he was a victim of someone selling him a blacklisted phone and hed never do that to anyone ever'' . A total con man. Only a stupid one doing business from his home.

gctest50 wrote: »

Send letters to his neighbours ? You'll end up in court

My second time in court. The first time I won my case. This con man is well known in the courts as a petty criminal by the way.

gctest50 wrote: »

You've no proof of anything

I have tons of proof.

Peregrinus

masculinist wrote: »

I have tons of proof.

If you're alleging fraud, what you need is proof that, at the time he said things to you that were untrue, he knew they were untrue. "I'm sure he knew!" and "he must have known!" and the like are not proof. Fraud requires active and intentional dishonesty, and the required standard of proof is high. Ignorance, carelessness, indifference to the truth - these things are not fraud. Nothing you have said in the thread so far suggests you have proof of fraud.

So, drop the fraud angle. Unless you have evidence that you have not mentioned here, you are not going to succeed in any claim which depends on an allegation of fraud.

A better angle to pursue might be to challenge the view that he is not dealing in the course of business, and so doesn't have the obligations that a business owes to a consumer and can't be pursued through the small claims procedure. If he has 200+ positive reps on adverts.ie, he's obviously selling on quite a scale. Might be worth raising this over on the legal issues board. (Note that they'll squash you from a great height if you ask for legal advice on your own situation, but if you raise the general question of how much dealing someone has to be doing to be viewed as dealing "in the course of business" for the purposes of the small claims procedure, that might help.)

masculinist

masculinist wrote: »

Went to sellers house 3 hours after sale and stood my ground, his personality changed jekyl and hyde style and he threatened violence but I wasn't having any of it. I kept the conversation rational.
Then he claims he spent some of the money on a ''takeaway'' and to pay off debts he had etc. He ended up giving me half back saying he didnt have any more. I said he will be seeing a lot of me at his door if he doesnt pay up.

Whatever about consumer rights or Gardai or all that nonsense, fair play to you for standing your ground masculinist!

99% of people would simply have accepted it and moaned on here without ever intending to do anything. Hat's as high in the air as it can go for you. You're dead right to challenge him on it.

Reading that has actually cheered me up this morning.


Hope it works out for you.

masculinist

Peregrinus wrote: »

If you're alleging fraud, what you need is proof that, at the time he said things to you that were untrue, he knew they were untrue. "I'm sure he knew!" and "he must have known!" and the like are not proof. Fraud requires active and intentional dishonesty, and the required standard of proof is high. Ignorance, carelessness, indifference to the truth - these things are not fraud. Nothing you have said in the thread so far suggests you have proof of fraud.

So, drop the fraud angle. Unless you have evidence that you have not mentioned here, you are not going to succeed in any claim which depends on an allegation of fraud.

A better angle to pursue might be to challenge the view that he is not dealing in the course of business, and so doesn't have the obligations that a business owes to a consumer and can't be pursued through the small claims procedure. If he has 200+ positive reps on adverts.ie, he's obviously selling on quite a scale. Might be worth raising this over on the legal issues board. (Note that they'll squash you from a great height if you ask for legal advice on your own situation, but if you raise the general question of how much dealing someone has to be doing to be viewed as dealing "in the course of business" for the purposes of the small claims procedure, that might help.)

The advert itself states the phone only needs unlocking. The phone is in my possession and is blacklisted. If the phone and its IMEI is registered at his name and address. Is this not physical proof of some sort of scam or fraud whatever language you want to use about it ? is this not a Physical record ? Unlike what he said to me which is true even if unfortunately i cant prove as i didnt record it.

Peregrinus

masculinist wrote: »

The advert itself states the phone only needs unlocking. The phone is in my possession and is blacklisted. If the phone and its IMEI is registered at his name and address. Is this not physical proof of some sort of scam or fraud whatever language you want to use about it ? is this not a Physical record ? Unlike what he said to me which is true even if unfortunately i cant prove as i didnt record it.

What you're missing is proof that , at the time he told you the phone could be unlocked, he knew that it was blacklisted and could not be unlocked. At the moment what you have loooks to me like proof that it was in fact blacklisted, but that's not the same thing. Even if you argue that he must have known the circumstances that led to the blacklisting, and if that argument is accepted, you still aren't there, since you can't prove that he understood that those circumstances would in fact lead to blacklisting.

What you need is proof of a communication from the phone company to him, dated from before the sale to you, saying "we're blacklisting your phone".

masculinist

Peregrinus wrote: »

What you're missing is proof that , at the time he told you the phone could be unlocked, he knew that it was blacklisted and could not be unlocked. At the moment what you have loooks to me like proof that it was in fact blacklisted, but that's not the same thing. Even if you argue that he must have known the circumstances that led to the blacklisting, and if that argument is accepted, you still aren't there, since you can't prove that he understood that those circumstances would in fact lead to blacklisting.

What you need is proof of a communication from the phone company to him, dated from before the sale to you, saying "we're blacklisting your phone".

Thanks for that. He did admit to me in person that he knew it was blacklisted - when I had returned and tried to brain hack him to get my money back. It was honestly a disgusting experience having to speak with him at all. He came across as a sociopathic character. If the phone was originally his then I'd expect the company did send him such a letter. I'm sure some sort of freedom of information request from Gardai could establish that.

Peregrinus

masculinist wrote: »

Thanks for that. He did admit to me in person that he knew it was blacklisted - when I had returned and tried to brain hack him to get my money back. It was honestly a disgusting experience having to speak with him at all. He came across as a sociopathic character. If the phone was originally his then I'd expect the company did send him such a letter. I'm sure some sort of freedom of information request from Gardai could establish that.

Freedom of information requests don't come from the Gardai; they come from citizens. And they don't go to private companies, but to government and public agencies. The FoI regime was not designed to be of any help to you in this situation, and it won't be.

Focus on what's possible here. What you have is a breach of contract. That doesn't depend on dishonesty and you don't have to prove dishonesty, so stop thinking about dishonesty. I think exploring the possiblity of a small claims procedure based on the volume and frequency of his dealings is a much more promising avenue.

masculinist

Peregrinus wrote: »

Freedom of information requests don't come from the Gardai; they come from citizens. And they don't go to private companies, but to government and public agencies. The FoI regime was not designed to be of any help to you in this situation, and it won't be.

Focus on what's possible here. What you have is a breach of contract. That doesn't depend on dishonesty and you don't have to prove dishonesty, so stop thinking about dishonesty. I think exploring the possiblity of a small claims procedure based on the volume and frequency of his dealings is a much more promising avenue.

Thanks again. Thats logical. He has a fair amount of dealings but not mainly phones. Its bric a brac mainly . Unless he kept selling the same model of phone to people again and again by republishing the advert.

Payton

I know someone who bought a phone from adverts recently, it was on the meteor network..on inspection it worked and was able to ring out on it. Fast forward 2 weeks and it was blacklisted!! The buyer contacted meteor and explained they had purchased it from adverts, he provided the imei number with his own details and they un blacklisted it, and it's working perfectly now.
Failing that sell it on for parts to cover the 50% your have outstanding.
Your lucky you got 50% of your money back...learn from it and move on. It's a big bad world out there and some dellboys operating.

masculinist

Payton wrote: »

I know someone who bought a phone from adverts recently, it was on the meteor network..on inspection it worked and was able to ring out on it. Fast forward 2 weeks and it was blacklisted!! The buyer contacted meteor and explained they had purchased it from adverts, he provided the imei number with his own details and they un blacklisted it, and it's working perfectly now.
Failing that sell it on for parts to cover the 50% your have outstanding.
Your lucky you got 50% of your money back...learn from it and move on. It's a big bad world out there and some dellboys operating.

Indeed. I thought it wasnt risky because I was inside this persons home. Very naive of me I suppose as I treat guests well and would be shocked at any idea otherwise. I'd have never bought a phone off him in a Spar shop or in an alley etc. The last phone I bought off adverts I collected at the sellers place of work [ no offence to the unemployed who have been overwhelmingly forced into that situation since the recession. I have been in those shoes myself but at least if they work they might have a greater chance of being honest and have a reputation to lose with their employer etc] and it served me well until it broke.
Thankfully it was a cheap lesson. And I was quoted 60 euro to switch motherboards and thus end up with basically a new better condition phone in the end. And I could sell the extra charger for a tenner if I want. As well as sell the remaining parts on ebay. The personal consequences are my time, the stress and hassle. What haunts me is the need to bring this person to justice. So I will report him fully to adverts and explore all legal methods to minimize future victims. I could imagine some teenager with his life savings calling to this persons house in the future and then ending up with nothing and being totally intimidated.

Henry Ford III

Why would anyone buy a phone that they couldn't see working? That'd be like buying a car without going for a test drive or even starting the engine.

masculinist

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Why would anyone buy a phone that they couldn't see working? That'd be like buying a car without going for a test drive or even starting the engine.

Thanks for that positive contribution to the thread . I'll refrain from repeating what I've already written .

The Muppet

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Why would anyone buy a phone that they couldn't see working? That'd be like buying a car without going for a test drive or even starting the engine.

Someone handy might buy a car without starting the engine if the price was right and they though they could get it going and end up with a cheap car, Of course there are risks involved.

coylemj

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Why would anyone buy a phone that they couldn't see working? That'd be like buying a car without going for a test drive or even starting the engine.

+1 or buying a car with an expired NCT on the basis of a 'guarantee' from the dealer that it will 'sail through' the test. And we all know what happens next.....

ScouseMouse

Have you actually contacted adverts about this? Like spocker suggested above? While adverts is predominantly an advertising medium, they will try and assist if you ask them.

As spocker said above, email them on support@adverts.ie

coylemj

ScouseMouse wrote: »

Have you actually contacted adverts about this? Like spocker suggested above? While adverts is predominantly an advertising medium, they will try and assist if you ask them.

I strongly suspect that their lawyers will have told them not to get involved in individual sales, otherwise to do so would be a tacit admission that they were a party to the sale which could expose them to a legal liability to buyers who got burned like the OP.

'Nothing to do with us' or something along those lines will be the response, same as I got from donedeal.ie when I tried to alert them to a car for sale on their website which had outstanding finance.

ScouseMouse

coylemj wrote: »

I strongly suspect that their lawyers will have told them not to get involved in individual sales, otherwise to do so would be a tacit admission that they were a party to the sale which could expose them to a legal liability to buyers who got burned like the OP.

'Nothing to do with us' or something along those lines will be the response, same as I got from donedeal.ie when I tried to alert them to a car for sale on their website which had outstanding finance.

You only suspect this. You do not know this. Possibly you are correct or perhaps it could trigger an email or call to the seller which could attempt to assist. A reminder that if their feedback is so good, it could be affected by this or their account could be removed.

Del2005

masculinist wrote: »

So I will report him fully to adverts and explore all legal methods to minimize future victims. I could imagine some teenager with his life savings calling to this persons house in the future and then ending up with nothing and being totally intimidated.

Just to point out that even if you do manage to get a case against the seller and somehow win, the real fun starts with trying to enforce it.

You aren't going to protect anyone if you win. There will be a civil ruling against the person, is there even anywhere to see the results of cases?, but all that they need to do is create another account and start selling.

masculinist

Del2005 wrote: »

Just to point out that even if you do manage to get a case against the seller and somehow win, the real fun starts with trying to enforce it.

You aren't going to protect anyone if you win. There will be a civil ruling against the person, is there even anywhere to see the results of cases?, but all that they need to do is create another account and start selling.

Can the courts dock a fiver a week from his social welfare until its all paid off ?

Peregrinus

If you get a court judgment, there are a variety of methods of enforcing it - put it in the hands of the sheriff, register a judgment mortgage, seek an attachment of earnings order, seek a winding-up order if the debtor is a company, petition to make the debtor a bankrupt if the debtor is an individual, etc.

You can pursue whichever one you think will be most effective, given the judgment debtor's circumstances. You can apply to the court have the debt deducted from social welfare payments, but note that you don't have a right to this; the court will consider all the circumstances, including those of the debtor and his dependants, the bottom line being that you can't get blood from a stone. But if your objective is to make the man's life a misery in the hope of discouraging this kind of behaviour, and you don't mind spending your own time and emotional energy, you might consider applying for some of these remedies even if you don't expect to get them.

The bottom line, though, is that you chose to deal with this guy, whom you didn't know, in an informal and largely unregulated market, and in doing so you were choosing to take a risk on his integrity and reliability. You're out of pocket by a couple of hundred euros, and you have my sympathy and I understand your indignation. But from a public policy point of view it doesn't makes sense to devote more than a limited amount time and resources of courts, guards, Dept of Social Welfare, etc to try and insulate you from the fact that the risk went against you. Judgment enforcement mechanisms are of limited efficiency in collecting very small debts; the costs of making them signficantly more efficient would vastly outweigh the social utility of enabling the collection of a greater proportion of those debts. At some point you're going to have to chalk this one down to experience.

ScouseMouse

Would you not just ask Adverts to contact him? Ok, he could tell them to feck off, but it wont cost you anything and you may get somewhere.

Talk of legal and other measures, as pointed out above, probably wont get you anywhere. Unless you have plenty of time with nothing to do.....

masculinist

ScouseMouse wrote: »

Talk of legal and other measures, as pointed out above, probably wont get you anywhere. Unless you have plenty of time with nothing to do.....

I have the same amount of hours as anyone else. However I don't tend to waste my time. I'm not a couch potato for example. My downtime is wholesome and productive. Why begrudge me some pleasure [or compensation for sufferance endured] in my spare time at bringing some tiny sliver of consequences to this person ? Most people waste far more time sighing and complaining about how awful the world is. A nanostep is at least a step in the right direction.

ScouseMouse

OK so. You know best. Leave you to it.

No point in mentioning adverts will try to assist.

Scousemouse
Adverts mod.

Note. This is my opinion and is not official adverts info.

ArthurG

You got back half your money. How much are you 'owed'?. €20? €200?.