APO condition on sale

[jabberwock48]

I wonder if I could ask for advice. I have just sold a 130mm APO with an LZOS f/6 lens. The lens according to the certificate was manufactured late 2006 and the scope about 2 years later. In my opinion the lens was in very good condition. At the buyers request I shone a torch in the lens to look for any fungal growth between the elements. I could see nothing at all.
Now after handover midway between us, the buyer on getting it home and examining it with a LED torch (and magnifying glass?) claims to have found a few small spots of fungal growth on the second element (?) and wants to reject it.
Previously he had complained about the Feather Touch focuser (now withdrawn) and then about the dewshield retaining screw not working.
The same scope but with a 3.5in focuser rather than a 2in Feather Touch now sells for about £6500 as opposed to the £2200 he paid. There were some cosmetic markings on the carbon fibre tube and alloy parts of which I supplied photos and he accepted.
Regards
John

[casstony]

Id offer to take the scope back minus any postage costs to avoid any aggravation.
It does sound like he's being unreasonable though if he inspected the lens at handover.

[Renato1]

Take it back.

Then put it up for sale at £2599, and make it clear in the ad how much the new one costs. Put a link in to the new one.

Maybe let someone knock you down £99 on the asking price.
Regards,
Renato

[brian nordstrom]

:shrug:I think he is being unreasonably picky , tell him as said to send the scope back if he wants -post costs .

I would be very happy with that scope for that price , its 8 years old and wont be in as new condition no matter what .

Total BS in my opinion , I have a 5 year old Tak Fluorite and it is as good as a 5 year old lens lens can be , the man is a Pillick .
If he wants new he should lash out the cash and buy new , simple .

Brian.

[LewisM]

If you met and he inspected PRIOR to purchase, and he accepted the condition then the deal is completed. It is purely up to your sensibilities if you refund him or not - I definitely would meet again to physically take possession of the scope before handing back his monies.

[jabberwock48]

Hi
Some more advice needed I am afraid. As I said the buyer asked me to shine a torch in to inspect the lens. Which I duly did and saw absolutely nothing. He now says I should have done this close up with a magnifying glass to spot any spots invisible to the naked eye. Can this possibly be reasonable? Do you do this routinely when buying or selling a scope?
John

[casstony]

John, I think you've run into a real life Sheldon Cooper :)

Perhaps you should have taken a swab and see what would grow in a petri dish.

Seriously, the buyer could simply expose the lens to direct sunlight to kill off any potential fungus, being careful not to focus light on the side of the tube.

[LewisM]

I was about to say that. I had an astrograph refractor with a mold issue. I exposed it to sunlight for 10 minutes, and it was gone. I made sure I put a desiccant bag in with it for storage, and no issues with mold regrowth in over a year of storage. In our biohazard labs at work (PC2), we simply run ethanol and UV to kill bacterium and spores. I work with pathogenic bacteriophages (virii that kill bacteria) and it is ethanol and UV. We RARELY use bleach except where there is a significant spill.

He is making a mountain out of a mole hill. He simply has buyer's remorse, which for the deal he got,is unthinkable! I'd buy it for that, mold issue known, in a heart beat.

Again, he inspected it personally, he accepted it. For him now to comeback after purchase and acceptance is like someone buying a glass,dropping it and taking the shards back for a refund.

[pmrid]

John, I imagine you were pretty quick to examine the lenses yourself to confirm the buyer's observations. Is he right?
Peter

[LewisM]

It is literally looking a gift horse in the mouth.

Is it reasonable to inspect it as he suggested? Well, he did not suggest magnified inspection in the first instance, nor did he do a magnified inspection at hand over, and was not till later that he did a magnified inspection.

He accepted it as is. I think it is entirely up to your sensibilities and judgement how you proceed from here. Not much help I know, but legally, he accepted it's condition upon payment after inspection.

[barx1963]

John
Just to be clear, several respondants have stated that the buyer inspected the scope at handover but I cannot see a reference to this in your post? From what I can see he asked you to inspect it and then he inspected it after he got it home, is that correct?

Malcolm

[LewisM]

Agree with Malcolm, perhaps I was assuming/jumping the gun. Any serious person would inspect at time of handover, and by your statement that you personally handed it over at a place half-way between each other's abodes,I assumed - perhaps incorrectly - he was sensible enough to check it out prior to handing over of money.

If this is a bad assumption (AS MOST ASSUMPTIONS ARE) then I apologise. Still, I believe legally once goods are exchanged in return for an agreed amount then the sale is concluded. It is now YOUR discretion.

[brian nordstrom]

:mad2:John I had the same thing recently in selling an Ioptron IEQ45 mount the was sold 2nd hand in very good condition as good as a 2 year old used ( a lot ) mount can be , all issues ( cosmetically only ) and extras were finialised and the deal was done .

Money received , mount sent .

A week later I got an angry PM from the seller stating " where is the vixen style dovetail that he seen in a photo on IIS that he pulled from 18 months ago ??" ,,, WTF?
I sent an even angrier PM back stateing ,, the vixen dovetail was NOT!! part of the deal , it came with a Losmandy style only ,, so GO AWAY !!! .

Next a big Boo-Hoo thread on IIS about how I ripped him off ??? man some people cant be pleased , can they ? and it sounds like you have one of them , tell him to suck up and handle it ! .

The IIS Mods pulled his thread within 5 hours .

You aint alone here John.:D .

Brian.

[jabberwock48]

Hello
Yes handover was at a busy railway station. He had paid me via PayPal in advance. The scope was covered in bubble-wrap inside a Geoptik case. He did not ask to inspect it there and then. He complained about the focuser as soon as he got home. This was merely a minor bit of binding between the fine and coarse knob that I had not noticed and was easily rectified. Then came up with a complaint about the dew shield retaining knob.
Then either in the evening or maybe the next day started complaining about some small spots inside the lens (not detectable to the naked eye using a bright torch as I had done) which may or not be mold.
Since I did a 200 mile rail journey at my expense to hand it over I am not inclined to take it back. I think the asking and paid price of £2200 was very fair for the condition - I looked and saw essentially the same scope (APM rather than A&M) with same lens and focuser with ally tube rather than carbon fibre sold for £800 more
Thanks for the continuing advice guys
John

[Kunama]

I think you have done as much as could be expected, he was not buying a new scope and I assume you did not advertise it as being new or in new condition. For the price he paid seems like he got a bargain.

He should have inspected it upon receiving it and there and then rejected or accepted it. It would have to substantially different from your description for him to even have a claim through Paypal.

Were you to consider cancelling the sale, I would suggest that you first get the scope back and ensure that it is in the exact condition that you gave it to him in, then and only then should you refund the cash.