Well, the receiver arrived, but it didn't work. I reported this and the seller suggested that I contacted shipper (Hermes). The real problem was of course poor padding and packing and possibly something else. I also asked if it is OK to open the receiver to check the damage.
tate0511 didn't reply. I gave negative feedback and started dispute process. I opened the receiver's top cover and found out that it has suffered a serious liquid or water damage in its past. Photos are here.
I reported damage with photos. This is where hilarity starts. Seller answered after 12 days. It seems that the seller has not really checked if the receiver is functional at all. Seller only repeats and says: "everything was in full order when the device was sent". But she won't give any specific details how she can be sure everything was OK. Here is whole dispute correspondence so far:
gi3kjf 22.11.10 um 18:13:55 MEZ Because the device does not work and it has clear water or liquid damage, I want refund. In this case partial refund is acceptable, 90 euro. Delivering 100% working device to me was your responsibility , not mine. If you want to make claims to Hermes, it is your job to complain them, not mine. I have very patiently tried to understand what you mean by "100% working" etc. You have refused to clarify. I don't know why. Please read eBay seller's instructions. They explain everything. tate0511 22.11.10 um 13:31:09 MEZ I do not understand? That do you want from me? Money? That I have accepted back? Neither those nor other you do not receive, as the Device was in a full order. Can though what to write and ask from it there is nothing will not exchange! Good luck to you! gi3kjf 22.11.10 um 07:29:24 MEZ You say you used the device. Question remains: how? If you say it worked 100%, you should be able to answer how you used it. See previous detailed questions? For example, if you used the device only as decoration, I can understand. But did you actually listened to the radio with it? Previously you also said: "I have been simply assured that the device super" which means that didn't evaluate it yourself but someone else did that. So was it you or someone else? tate0511 21.11.10 um 22:29:39 MEZ You set many questions the respected. Questions usually set before purchase instead of after purchase. As you have given me a bad response about me, I am not going to conduct with you long correspondence. Please declare in central Ebay and there let solve who it is right and who is guilty. I wish you successes!!! gi3kjf 21.11.10 um 20:24:14 MEZ OK. A few clarifying questions: - What kind of loudspeakers did you have connected to the device? - Or did you use only headphones? Regarding contacting Hermes: Sender, that is you, is responsible contacting the shipper. Sender has the shipping agreement with Hermes, I don't even have contact information to Hermes as Hermes doesn't operate in Finland, they use some other company here. Did you pack the device or did Hermes pack it? tate0511 21.11.10 um 20:03:53 MEZ I used 3 years the device and all was before sale as it should be. Packing was good. I have sent you the device absolutely whole. For transportation and damage during transportation I do not answer. The package has been insured to 500 Euros. If you have questions to packing that it please to HERMES. gi3kjf 21.11.10 um 18:29:55 MEZ I am still trying to understand what you mean by saying: "Everything worked". How can you now? Did you use the device yourself? If not, did someone olse use it? When? Week ago? Month ago? Year ago? Ten years ago? And the device was broken when I received it. Why? Was it because of poor packing, liquid damage or what? Please answer. I am not interesting to head again your claim that everything _was_ OK. You were responsible to send it safely here, not me. gi3kjf 21.11.10 um 18:25:46 MEZ You say everything worked. What exactly worked? Did you hear radio program with the device? When listening to radio, did you use loudspeakers or headphones? Did you listen to records connecting a turntable to the device and then listening? If you didn't do these things, how can you claim that 35 years old device was in full working order? I mean, components age and if nobody checks (that radio works, for example), you cannot really say everything is working. Do you see my point? tate0511 21.11.10 um 18:16:28 MEZ The respected!!! The device was in a full order and we did not require check as all worked. Therefore I once again speak to you and I will speak that all was in a full order!!! You can declare where want but you do not receive money back. The DEVICE was In the FULL ORDER. gi3kjf 21.11.10 um 16:27:36 MEZ OK. So you admit that nobody checked that the device worked. When was the device last time used by someone? Like listened to the radio? Listened records with a turntable connected to the device? Were there loudspeakers connected to the device and was there sound coming out? What kind of loudspeakers were they? Or were only headphones used? I still want to understand. Is it so that you just "knew" that the device was OK without anyone even trying to use it? tate0511 21.11.10 um 14:12:39 MEZ The device did not need to be checked, as it was completely as it should be! The device was in a full order!!! gi3kjf 21.11.10 um 13:00:13 MEZ I ask again: How did you check that the device really worked 100%? Or did someone else check the device? And if so, who was that other person and how did he/she check it? I really want to know so I can understand. gi3kjf 21.11.10 um 12:55:06 MEZ Don't you see: - You just say again and again: device was ok, device was 100% good etc. - But apparently you don't have any expertise in audio or electronics, so your words mean little if you don't produce any justification for your words. On the other hand: - I have produced photos of the corrosion problem. - I have offered to get the device checked by an expert, if you want. - I have a university degree in electrical engineering and electronics is my hobby. tate0511 21.11.10 um 12:43:50 MEZ You can write and speak anything you like but I assure you that the device was as it should be! gi3kjf 21.11.10 um 00:05:43 MEZ How did you check the device really worked? Did you: 1) Connect it to an antenna to check that it could tune to FM stations? 2) ... check that headphones output really worked? 3) ... check that preamplifier outputs really worked? 4) ... check that all Nixie tube digits worked OK? 5) ... check that all preamplifier inputs worked? Also phono input? 6) ... check in which country it was made in? If you really checked all that, there is any point saying Technisch TOP! tate0511 20.11.10 um 19:27:03 MEZ The respected!!! I assure you that the Device was the worker!!! tate0511 20.11.10 um 19:26:25 MEZ The respected!!! I assure you that the Device was the worker!!! gi3kjf 20.11.10 um 13:25:28 MEZ Please consider this: 1) Please see the photos I have taken. 2) Then you can comment how it is possible that the device looks like that. 3) Then we can decide what is real and what is only something either of us is claiming. I think that is a rational way to handle this. It seems that you want to close your eyes from real facts. Regards, Antti gi3kjf 20.11.10 um 13:18:10 MEZ Then why didn't you pack it properly? Seller is supposed to pad the item properly, according to this: http://pages.ebay.de/help/pay/packing-tips.html As I have said, problems may be either because the liquid or water damage, and/or because of poor padding and packing. Seller is responsible for the packing. I have requested eBay to solve this. Until they do so, I will continue to discuss with you. Please provide your laywers email. Maybe he or she can see the whole picture. tate0511 20.11.10 um 08:59:46 MEZ The device was in a full order. You can complain anywhere. I am not going to return to you money, do not waste in vain the time and nerves. To in total you kind. gi3kjf 19.11.10 um 07:29:02 MEZ I am little bit worried that you imly that I forged photos you didn't even look at. And as I said , opening the device I own is my right, not an error. If you looked the photos, you would wee that the corrosion and liquid damage is real, not "Technisch und Optisch ist TOP!!!". And you didn't reply for three weeks when I complained and asked how to proceed. Do you want me to take the device to an expert for examination. Will you pay that examination and a certificate? tate0511 19.11.10 um 06:45:57 MEZ As you can prove that photos not forged and the device was damaged, you cannot prove it, as the device was in a full order. You had no right it to open. If it did not work you should carry and take it for examination the conclusion assured by the expert. I repeat YOU HAD no RIGHT IT to OPEN!!! It is your big error! gi3kjf 18.11.10 um 22:00:24 MEZ But the photos, which show the liquid or water damage, will probably interest eBay when they eventually mediate this dispute. I am not extorting you. I am just telling that this must be resolved in some way. And the facts speak for themselves. tate0511 18.11.10 um 21:39:01 MEZ Your photos are absolutely not interesting to me, I have been simply assured that the device super. Also stop to extort money. gi3kjf 18.11.10 um 20:53:08 MEZ In the item description you said: "Technisch und Optisch ist TOP!!!" and now you say: "I have been assured that the Device of 100 % is serviceable". That is not the same thing. And now you are accusing me of extortion and saying I am a criminal. I am proceeding according to eBay rules. And you still have not looked the photos which show the reality. You mischaracterized the item in the description. That is against eBay rules. Please provide me with the email of your lawyer. tate0511 18.11.10 um 20:38:54 MEZ You have opened the Device, have extended the details necessary to you and now wish to receive money still! You know that this extortion and it is punished by the law. I have been assured that the Device of 100 % is serviceable and unnecessary me now to think out different stories, anyhow you do not receive there is nothing back! gi3kjf 18.11.10 um 11:56:05 MEZ You say: "You write that opened the device, it for you is bad, as you had no right it to do." That is incorrect. I am the owner of that item, so I have and had all the right to open it. This is now a question of partial refund. And you did not respond to my question whether I can open it. So your point is not valid. gi3kjf 18.11.10 um 11:50:21 MEZ On Oct 26 I reported that the device does not work. I also asked if it is OK to open the device and check the condition. You did not reply. On Nov 2nd I opened it, took photos and send another mail. You didn't reply. You didn't reply until 12 days after I started this dispute process. So it took over three week for you to respond to my original complaint. An I have the evidence, the photos. I will continue to explain this to you until this is resolved, either by us or by eBay. tate0511 18.11.10 um 11:33:35 MEZ You write that opened the device, it for you is bad, as you had no right it to do. Now I have a complete proof. Save the time and do not write to me more! gi3kjf 18.11.10 um 10:06:42 MEZ You say: "The device was 100 % good". That is not true. Even before opening the top cover, it was clear that there is something suspicious. And after opening it was clear. You still have not looked at the photos. Please take a look. As I said, I have seen many electronics and audio devices and the water or liquid damage is quite clear. The top cover was cleaned outside but the inside is dirty and damaged. And the packing was not good. What does ".LŽÒŽëŽßŽÐŽïŽÛŽØ" mean? tate0511 18.11.10 um 09:40:20 MEZ The device was 100 % good. Probably you ŽÒŽëŽßŽÐŽïŽÛŽØ from it a detail, want now still money back. Is not present there is nothing at you does not leave. In the description costs that return is not present!!! gi3kjf 18.11.10 um 08:38:44 MEZ I am not going to drop the dispute until there is either agreement between us or eBay decides the case for us. Please don't threaten me. Please see the photos I took. You are of course free to consult a lawyer and if you do so, please provide me his/her contact info so I can email with him/her and explain the whole issue. My email is email@example.com But emailing to you in this way is within eBay rules. And you have agreed to follow eBay rules when selling your items. gi3kjf 18.11.10 um 07:40:04 MEZ Please consider this: - As a seller, you have an item. - You are required to inspect it and understand its condition. - If you are sure that it is good, you can write "Technisch und Optisch ist TOP!!!". - If you are not sure, you just write "Used, possibly broken". - And in either case, if someone buys it, you pack it properly. Enough padding etc, as eBay packing instructions mandate. You have not looked the photos I took, why? They speak for themselves. tate0511 18.11.10 um 07:35:57 MEZ I with you do not agree and cease to demand from me money, in opposite cases I will address to the Lawyer and I will show it all our correspondence. Once again I speak that you did not write to me more or I will transfer all to my lawyer. gi3kjf 17.11.10 um 21:55:29 MEZ Opening the device is irrelevant as I didn't do anything besides taking photos. And you didn't reply when I asked about opening it. I hope you understand that I am electronics engineer. I have serviced tape recorders and other audio devices and I know how they are supposed to look if in good condition. The item you sold is quite clearly in bad condition, not good. If you agree to my suggestion, you have still got 90 euro for the device, which is not bad at all. gi3kjf 17.11.10 um 21:48:53 MEZ You have been quite unresponsive. On Oct 26 I asked if it is OK to open the device and check the condition. You did not reply. On Nov 2nd I opened it, took photos and send another mail. You didn't reply. You didn't reply until 12 days after I started this dispute process. I say it again: The item is not "Technisch und Optisch ist TOP!!!". That is what you said and it is not true. My suggestion is fair. tate0511 17.11.10 um 21:24:47 MEZ There is no I with it do not agree, as you already opened the Device. On it I finish our correspondence. In my description in a bottom it is very clearly written that return is not present!!! gi3kjf 17.11.10 um 21:04:26 MEZ Please consider my proposition of paying back half of the original price. I think it is fair. I think 90 euro is about the fair price for parts possibly usable as spare parts. If that is acceptable for you, I can live with it. gi3kjf 17.11.10 um 21:02:35 MEZ In the item description you said: "Technisch und Optisch ist TOP!!!" That means that the item is supposed to be in _good_ condition. Mischaracterization is forbidden by eBay rules. Further, the packing was not good enough. It was also against eBay packing instuctions: http://pages.ebay.de/help/pay/packing-tips.html This is not about warranty. This is about not telling the condition of the item. tate0511 17.11.10 um 20:50:55 MEZ Privatverkauf deshalb keine Garantie, keine R.AŽückname oder Žähnliche AnsprŽüche. Alle Fragen mŽüssen unbedingt vor dem Bieten geklŽärt werden gi3kjf 17.11.10 um 19:27:05 MEZ Could you please answer and comment. I have made a proposition in correspondence. If that is acceptable, you can proceed with that. gi3kjf 05.11.10 um 07:46:24 MEZ Artikel weicht erheblich von der Beschreibung ab: REVOX (Artikelnr. 170549156251) Zahlungsmethode: BankŽüberweisung Zahlungsdatum: 11. Okt. 2010 Weitere Informationen: The item is not as described. 1) It doesn't work. 2) It has experienced a liquid or water damage and requires extensive amount of work to get repaired, if that is possible at all. 3) The item was poorly packed, only a thin layer of cardboard and no protection for knobs and dials and corners. This is clearly agains eBay packing instructions. Tried to blame shipper. 4) The seller has not responded since Oct 26th. Pics of the damage: [photo page]