Yes, I did give mostly pos. feedback - excepting the accurate item description. The seller said that PP was holding the money and that she needed it. I did tell her that the bag did not appear to have been worn only 2 times. I also mentioned that it is best when selling on ebay that you clearly represent the flaws in a bag.
The next day I posted pics of the bag on the BE forum and asked the ladies there if the wear I described were possible with only a few wearings. The resounding answer was NO. At this point I emailed Sara and asked for a partial refund due to the misrepresentation and true condition of the bag. She said no, and that the bag was described as "used." Then she posted this thread. I emailed Suzi the mod about how to proceed. Though Suzi suggested staying out of it, I felt that the indignance in this post required that the facts at least be present in this thread.
Her indignance at a buyer having issue with such obvious misrepresentation still shocks me. Less so after learning of the history of the bag and her other postings in the BE subforum.
After I filed the claim she sent me an email later yesterday stating that if PP sides with me she does not have the money and will not have the money until she gets paid. She said she has "negative quid."
And, the OP would definitely be raving mad if she bought a bag for about $300 that was described as used twice when for just a little over $100 more she could have had a new bag and none of this drama.
The next day I posted pics of the bag on the BE forum and asked the ladies there if the wear I described were possible with only a few wearings. The resounding answer was NO. At this point I emailed Sara and asked for a partial refund due to the misrepresentation and true condition of the bag. She said no, and that the bag was described as "used." Then she posted this thread. I emailed Suzi the mod about how to proceed. Though Suzi suggested staying out of it, I felt that the indignance in this post required that the facts at least be present in this thread.
Her indignance at a buyer having issue with such obvious misrepresentation still shocks me. Less so after learning of the history of the bag and her other postings in the BE subforum.
After I filed the claim she sent me an email later yesterday stating that if PP sides with me she does not have the money and will not have the money until she gets paid. She said she has "negative quid."
And, the OP would definitely be raving mad if she bought a bag for about $300 that was described as used twice when for just a little over $100 more she could have had a new bag and none of this drama.
Last edited:
