Idea's and suggestions to problem

[OVAS-Webmaster]

The other problem I am having with this is the response from OVAS. I'm not sure I agree that this is just like kijiji or some other classifieds. First these are paying members that use the classifieds. I know this is changing but it was this way in this particular situation. Even when this does change there will be suggested fees for transactions. That makes this more like Ebay were there is some protection. Now I know there is no protection stated, but I am just disagreeing with the fact that there is no support through OVAS. At least some pressure or understanding would be nice from a community board such as this. Couple that with the fact that this is a community of people with common interest I find it disappointing that a statement was made to ensure no support would be offered by OVAS. Support wasn't even asked for here, so it just seems insulting to have it stated there will be no help with this situation.

It was stated in this situation because there was going to be the inevitable question about what we could do about it AND because we were already approached about it.

This exact situation came up several years ago and the consensus at the time on the Exec was that if there was some implied responsibility on our part to intervene in disputes between sellers and buyers we would shut down the classifieds rather than to take on this added responsibility.

[NanoSF]

I do understand that there is very little OVAS could even do if they wanted. I do understand that this particular situation is not cut and dry and there is no way that sides could be taken. I guess what I figured would happen was something similar to what happens if there is an argument with potentially inappropriate words on the boards or in personal messages. That the webmaster or board moderator would send a message stating a lack of taking sides, but a suggestion of some kind of mutual resolution. Maybe it would mean nothing to the situation, but at least it would be support from your community of hobbyists. Rather than making sure everyone knows there is no support in this situation. I did not know that this stemmed from previous situations and the fact that OVAS was approached about this particular situation. After just reading this thread there is no indication of this. That being the case I probably would not have made the comment, but I still feel a simple yet likely ineffective procedure could be in place. At least for moral support. 

[Jeff1192]

Just to save you from wasting your time....this is not something the police will get involved in. It is a civil dispute that needs to be resolved is small claims court. There is nothing criminal here, shading practices yes, but not criminal.

[jimskoi]

I think I know who this person is.
He gave us a deposit for an item.Then changed his mind.Then wanted his deposit back.Then he stated all these reasons why we should give it back.We did.Wont deal with him again.

[FocusFin]

The consumer protection act states a deposit over 50.00$ entitles me to a 10 day cool down period in which I can change my mind and receive a full refund including deposit, Regardless of any terms of the Agreement.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_02c30_e.htm

Requirements for direct agreements

42.  Every direct agreement shall be in writing, shall be delivered to the consumer and shall be made in accordance with the prescribed requirements. 2002, c. 30, Sched. A, s. 42.

Cancellation: cooling-off period

43.  (1)  A consumer may, without any reason, cancel a direct agreement at any time from the date of entering into the agreement until 10 days after receiving the written copy of the agreement. 2002, c. 30, Sched. A, s. 43 (1).

Cancellation: failure to meet requirements

(2)  In addition to the right under subsection (1), a consumer may cancel a direct agreement within one year after the date of entering into the agreement if the consumer does not receive a copy of the agreement that meets the requirements under section 42. 2002, c. 30, Sched. A, s. 43 (2).

You have taken this out of context and completely misinterpreted it.

A direct agreement refers to sales that take place away from the supplier's place of business in other words "directly to the consumer". It protects consumers against such things as "door to door sales" and it relates to actual businesses selling to the public, not a private sale of used items. It specifically requires a written agreement by the supplier which in this case does not exist because this is not a business selling you a tank, it's a private individual and he is under no obligation to provide anything in writing to you, it's up to you to demand a contract before handing over your money. As far as anyone is concerned, this agreement never existed because you have no proof that any agreement was entered into, no receipt for the money paid, no cancelled cheque etc...

To prove that an agreement was entered into and that you are entitled to either your money or the tank you would have to go to small claims court and allow a judge to hear all of the facts, determine what exactly took place and decide who is more credible.

The consumer protection act protects "consumers" against unlawful, unreasonable or predatory acts of businesses, it does not regulate "garage sales" which is in effect what these types of transactions amount to.

I don't want to seem harsh, I personally think this individual is despicable and judging from his impulsive nature probably not all that stable, but if you're going to rely on the "consumer protection act" to remedy this you're going to be very disappointed. If you feel the matter warrants it, go to small claims court, otherwise you're wasting your time.

[Tsukiyomi-sakura]

You have taken this out of context and completely misinterpreted it.

A direct agreement refers to sales that take place away from the supplier's place of business in other words "directly to the consumer". It protects consumers against such things as "door to door sales" and it relates to actual businesses selling to the public, not a private sale of used items. It specifically requires a written agreement by the supplier which in this case does not exist because this is not a business selling you a tank, it's a private individual and he is under no obligation to provide anything in writing to you, it's up to you to demand a contract before handing over your money. As far as anyone is concerned, this agreement never existed because you have no proof that any agreement was entered into, no receipt for the money paid, no cancelled cheque etc...

To prove that an agreement was entered into and that you are entitled to either your money or the tank you would have to go to small claims court and allow a judge to hear all of the facts, determine what exactly took place and decide who is more credible.

The consumer protection act protects "consumers" against unlawful, unreasonable or predatory acts of businesses, it does not regulate "garage sales" which is in effect what these types of transactions amount to.

I don't want to seem harsh, I personally think this individual is despicable and judging from his impulsive nature probably not all that stable, but if you're going to rely on the "consumer protection act" to remedy this you're going to be very disappointed. If you feel the matter warrants it, go to small claims court, otherwise you're wasting your time.

The Act apparently does regulate private sales because in this case it is technically a contract, that and the fact I have the recording of him admitting there was such a contract, he does have my money and is refusing to give it back, Plus the previous tenants from the place he moved out from can be found and contacted because they were there at the time of the agreement.

Verbal agreements are also legally binding unless it's a house or plot of land, that and both times there were two separate witnesses (the day of agreement and the day of refusal) to the knowledge there is a verbal agreement, plus two others who overheard a phone call discussing the details of the agreement, It's basically five vs. one as he both times had no witness, And a judge will obviously asking a few questions to him and reviewing the video clip, emails and incoming plus outgoing calls, the Real estate lady who witnessed us at the property along with the couple who were there at the time, and withdraw of money from my bank account on the day we viewed the tank 400$ which was agreed I would put 200$ to hold it down and pay the other 200$ on pick up, and we were arranging the rest of it to be paid monthly.

Even if the act does not hold up, He cannot deny he did not have dealings with me and was in contact with myself and Roommate, And what is he going to do, deny it's not him in the video? 'officer I have an evil twin brother who looks and sounds just like me who said that he is not paying this girl back her deposit on the fish tank' Lol... sorry I just crack up thinking about this bit it's rather funny.

Even if pre say it does not go through courts and I am at a loss, There is still a big tipping factor in him being honest and not stealing, Many people in the hobby will not tolerate or deal with someone like this, and he's going to end up with a bad rap and no one is going to want to deal with him.

Also, you said he sounds unstable..? how so do you mean? Financially he just bought a brand new condo and owns three vehicles, one being a 2010 escalade and another a higher end car from 2008, Plus a new 300g starfire front tank, If that is what you mean, I really just can't see it, how 200$ would make him go broke.

But anyways as far as legal things go, It's just a matter of waiting for a day when the lawyer can meet us to talk about, Maybe by that time he will come around.

It's sad there are such people in the hobby.

[Hookup]

So if I got this correct, this un-named person has done this before, here on or related to OVAS?

If so, can you please post the name so buyer be ware... 

[OVAS-Webmaster]

This thread has the potential to get a bit out of hand, however as long as no names are used in the discussion it will remain on the forum.

As mentioned before.......

[Tsukiyomi-sakura]

So if I got this correct, this un-named person has done this before, here on or related to OVAS?

If so, can you please post the name so buyer be ware... 

Not allowed to  state on the forums the name of the individual, But I guess that does not stop anyone in private from asking me?

[FocusFin]

The Act apparently does regulate private sales because in this case it is technically a contract, that and the fact I have the recording of him admitting there was such a contract, he does have my money and is refusing to give it back,

From the Industry Canada website, Office of Consumer Affairs:

Deposits
A deposit is usually a lump sum of money required to reserve or hold a product or service. Whether it's a deposit on a vehicle, a hall rental, a grad outfit or a photographer, be sure that you want the product or service. If you change your mind, you are not, by law, entitled to get your money back. Be sure to ask what the conditions are before you put down a deposit, and only put down the minimum amount required.

Private Sales
A private sale is between individuals, not between a consumer and a business. Most consumer legislation does not include private sales. If something goes wrong, your consumer affairs office may not be able to get involved. You will need to deal with the seller. If the seller isn't willing, your next step is court action. If the amount of money you want from the seller is under the limit, you could use small claims court. Check with your provincial or territorial consumer affairs office for more information.


The "Consumer Protection Act" does not regulate privates sales between individuals, only business and consumer.

[NanoSF]

Not allowed to  state on the forums the name of the individual, But I guess that does not stop anyone in private from asking me?

Yes good question. If this person is going to be protected then does this still apply to PM's? It is just not sitting well that there is someone going around (and I do think I know who it is too. If I am right yes they have a history) and being less than honest to say the least, but we are walking on egg shells here.

[OVAS-Webmaster]

Yes good question. If this person is going to be protected then does this still apply to PM's?

OVAS does not read or regulate PMs between users, unless there is an official (police) request to do so.

[Tsukiyomi-sakura]

Even if the act does not hold up, He cannot deny he did not have dealings with me and was in contact with myself and Roommate, And what is he going to do, deny it's not him in the video? 'officer I have an evil twin brother who looks and sounds just like me who said that he is not paying this girl back her deposit on the fish tank' Lol... sorry I just crack up thinking about this bit it's rather funny.

I cannot resist:

[NanoSF]

OVAS does not read or regulate PMs between users, unless there is an official (police) request to do so.

Well that is not true as far as the read part goes. If you report a PM you got from someone then the moderator or Webmaster can and does read it. I guess the point is we can PM and state this persons name, correct?

[OVAS-Webmaster]

Well that is not true as far as the read part goes. If you report a PM you got from someone then the moderator or Webmaster can and does read it. I guess the point is we can PM and state this persons name, correct?

Ok, read, as in use an external tool to directly look at the Personal Messages table in the back end of the forum software.  If you report something it's the same as forwarding it.

[Tsukiyomi-sakura]

I see what you did there great fish in the sky.....

Now we wait...

[NanoSF]

I think many of us know, but I think posts like this might get the thread shut down if we are not careful. The best defense we have is to keep this topic alive so more people are curious enough to become informed.

[Stussi613]

I can understand why OVAS would not want to get involved in disputes, but at the same time I think that there might be a better way to do this. I think in the past that the idea of rating sellers and buyers was brought forward...something like iTrader on simplydiscus.  The majority of the sellers on the classifieds are legit and pleasant to deal with...but for those that aren't the community would benefit from having a way to indicate when someone is less than honest. Considering that the exec is considering opening the classifieds to non-members again...maybe it could be discussed?

The reality is that I could rip people off all the time with no recourse, but have my account yanked for one off colour remark in the forum.

[NanoSF]

I can understand why OVAS would not want to get involved in disputes, but at the same time I think that there might be a better way to do this. I think in the past that the idea of rating sellers and buyers was brought forward...something like iTrader on simplydiscus.  The majority of the sellers on the classifieds are legit and pleasant to deal with...but for those that aren't the community would benefit from having a way to indicate when someone is less than honest. Considering that the exec is considering opening the classifieds to non-members again...maybe it could be discussed?

The reality is that I could rip people off all the time with no recourse, but have my account yanked for one off colour remark in the forum.

+1

[Tsukiyomi-sakura]

+1

+1