I don't bring this up lightly...

[franzfmdavis]

One of the many benefits of a community like we have on AH is that we have developed, and can therefore reasonably expect, a high level of trust and honesty in comparison to the general population.

This has tremendous value and members regularly safeguard it by banding together to expose scammers, or by sharing positive experiences with other members to publicly enhance their reputation as a buyer or seller for others to rely upon.

But what should we do when we have a concerning experience with a member of the AH family that is well known and well regarded? It is certainly something that should be attempted to be resolved privately first. But if we cannot resolve it privately, should it be brought to the attention of the AH community? I believe it should if there is a chance that similar future behavior by the member could harm another member of the AH community.

The facts:

• On December 31, 2024, I noticed @Rare Breed classified ad dated December 28, 2024 selling his 470 Rigby double rifle titled: “My 470 Rigby DR with Everything 20% Discount”: https://www.africahunting.com/threa...rything-20-discount.88773/page-2#post-1346096
• I told my brother-in-law about it and assured him that @Rare Breed was a trustworthy seller based on my knowledge of his numerous interactions and transactions on the site, as well as some direct communications I had with him regarding reloading questions during which he had been very polite and helpful. Based on this, I offered to help my brother-in-law negotiate the transaction.
• I contacted @Rare Breed on December 31, 2024 and we eventually connected at 1:52pm. He asked whether I had any questions about the rifle and I said I did not and that it looked like it was in great shape from the pictures. He confirmed that the rifle was in great shape and that JJ Perodeau had even called it “perfect” when he had serviced it – a point he also described in the ad. We subsequently communicated a few times about payment and shipping details, and he agreed to ship the rifle and the reloading supplies insured for $20,375.
• During our conversation, we both expressed that we trusted each other based on the reputations we had each developed on AH. Accordingly, @Rare Breed shipped the rifle and reloading supplies before even receiving payment, and my brother-in-law bought the rifle based on the pictures and description provided, as well as my assurances about @Rare Breed.
• My brother-in-law received the rifle on January 7, 2025. Unfortunately, the condition of the rifle was not as described or shown in the pictures in @Rare Breed classified ad on AH. The pictures in @Rare Breed ad did not show any of the damage on the stock, foreend, or metal grip cap.
• These are the relevant pictures of the gun from @Rare Breed ad. Also note the date on top of the pictures: "December 8, 2023":

• These are pictures of the condition of the gun that was received by my brother-in-law:

• My brother-in-law was frustrated that the gun he received was in such different condition than advertised and did not want to keep it.
• Therefore, I contacted @Rare Breed that same day (on January 7, 2025), provided him pictures of the damage on the wood and metal, and indicated that we wanted to return the gun. @Rare Breed and I spoke by phone later that same day and, without hesitation, he agreed to take the rifle and reloading supplies back and reimburse the full cost of the gun and all the shipping incurred.
• During that call, I expressed that the pictures from the ad had not accurately depicted the condition of the gun. @Rare Breed asked if I was accusing him of manipulating the pictures. I responded that I was not accusing him of intentional misrepresentation, but that his responsibility as seller was to provide an accurate representation of the condition of the gun so that the buyer could make an informed decision. I had zoomed into the pictures on his ad as much as possible and none of the damage on the gun was visible. @Rare Breed assured me that pictures he had posted were current and accurate. He also stated that my brother-in-law should “expect” damage on a used rifle, but that he would nevertheless take it back and fully reimburse all of the costs.
• After our phone call, @Rare Breed memorialized his promise to reimburse all of the costs through a PM on AH at 12:15pm on January 7, 2025. Here is a screen shot of the PM:

• 

• It was only as I was saving the relevant pictures from @Rare Breed ad to my phone to insert into this post (displayed above) that I noticed that the pictures @Rare Breed posted in his December 2024 classified ad were from one year ago, dated December 8, 2023. Anyone can save the pictures from his original post and verify the date the pictures were taken. As a result, it became clear why the gun advertised was so different from the gun shipped. @Rare Breed said in his ad that he had “…taken his last elephant and buffalo with my incredible Rigby 470 DR.” He had also posted a hunt report on April 24, 2024 which shows he used the rifle (Note the date on the bottom of the picture: "April 25, 2024"). https://www.africahunting.com/threads/zimbabwe-terrific-with-tokoloshe-safaris.81649/.

• The pictures of the rifle that he used in his ad were taken 5 months prior to his 2024 hunt, during which the rifle stock and metal was likely damaged. This misrepresentation made it impossible for my brother-in-law to make an informed decision on the gun he wanted to buy.
• The issue is not whether a buyer should reasonably expect a used gun to have damage from prior use; the issue is that a buyer should reasonably expect to receive an accurate description of the current condition of the gun he is purchasing from the seller so that the buyer can make an informed decision.
• My brother-in-law shipped the gun back to @Rare Breed the next day, on January 8, 2025. I provided @Rare Breed a copy of the receipt and tracking number at 4:29 pm that day. Here is a screen shot of the PM:

• Responding almost immediately, @Rare Breed sent me a PM on January 8, 2025 at 4:31pm unilaterally backing out of his verbal and written promise to reimburse the $375 original shipping costs. He did this only AFTER the gun had been shipped back to him. Here is a screen shot of the PM:

• It is worth noting that at this point, he was still assuring me he would be paying for all of the return shipping for the rifle and reloading supplies - he unilaterally broke his promise again as you will see below.
• I responded to the PM that same evening at 5:14 pm correcting the total amount owed believing, at that time, that he had unintentionally misstated the total he had promised to pay back. Here is a copy of my responsive PM:

• However, @Rare Breed wrote back several times between 5:24 and 5:26 pm that day reasserting that he would not be refunding the total shipping costs, and failing to acknowledge his prior verbal and written promises. Here are screen shots of these PMs:

• 

• I immediately called @Rare Breed at 5:30pm to try and resolve this over the phone rather than over PM. We spoke for 19 minutes that night (January 8, 2025). During that conversation, we politely, but frankly, discussed our various viewpoints of the matter, and ultimately reached a compromised agreement whereby @Rare Breed would reimburse the cost of the gun and the shipping of the gun and reloading supplies to us ($20,375), as well as the cost of the shipping of the gun back to him ($164). In turn, I would cover the cost of the shipping of the of the reloading supplies back to him, which were yet to be determined. We both acknowledged that our goal was to reach a “gentleman’s agreement.”

• The day after I received the reloading supplies, I shipped them back to @Rare Breed without even opening the box. It cost me $129. I immediately sent him a PM with a copy of the tracking number. This was on January 9, 2025 at 12:05pm. Here is screen shot of that PM:

• At that point, I expected that he would be reimbursing $20,375 + 164 = $20,539 as he had promised to do during our telephone call on January 8th.
• However, on January 10, 2025 at 9:58 am, @Rare Breed sent me a PM stating that he would only be reimbursing $20,164. Here is a screen shot of that PM:

• AGAIN, @Rare Breed unilaterally changed terms of the agreement to his benefit AFTER I had shipped back the reloading supplies.
• I immediately tried to call him at 10:21am but he did not answer. I left a short message, but he did not return my call.

• Since he did not answer my call, I wrote to him clarifying the terms of our compromise, and even reminded him of his original promise to fully reimburse all of the costs. I also requested that he call me so that we could talk in person. Here is a screen shot of my PM (the 5539 referenced in the PM was supposed to read $539):

• Instead, he responded to me by PM on January 10, 2025 at 12:16pm cutting off further communication on the topic and refusing to honor either of his prior agreements. In this PM, he claimed, inaccurately: “I guarantee the product both rifle and reloading supplies not reimbursing you back my shipping cost.” He further stated: “I am not deviating from this given I am 100% sure all forum members would agree with me.” Here is a screen shot of this PM:

• On January 10, 2025, @Rare Breed sent me $15,000 as partial reimbursement.
• On January 11, 2025, @Rare Breed sent me an additional $5,164, bring the total reimbursement to $20,164.
• @Rare Breed received the gun back on January 13, 2025.
• @Rare Breed received the unopened package of reloading supplies back on January 14, 2025.
• I sent a PM to @Rare Breed on January 14, 2025 to confirm that he had received both the gun and reloading supplies, and he immediately responded that he had and raised no concerns. Here is a screen shot of that exchange on PM:

• Since I had assured by brother-in-law that @Rare Breed was a trustworthy seller, I personally reimbursed him for the $504 that @Rare Breed had promised but failed to honor, as well as the $40 FFL transfer fee and $10 certified check fee he had to incur.
• In total, @Rare Breeds misrepresentation of the condition of the gun, as well as his failure to honor his original agreement to reimburse the full costs, and his failure to honor the compromised agreement to reimburse all but $129 of the costs, has cost me $554.

This is a significant amount of money, but what is more hurtful is that it was caused through the violation of trust by a well-regarded AH forum member whom I considered a friend. For this very reason, it is more hurtful that than the $2,600 I lost to an unknown scammer on Gun Broker a few years ago.

I believe I made every reasonable attempt to resolve this matter privately out of respect for the pubic reputation of a respected forum member, and our friendship. However, @Rare Breed final communication to me has led me to bring this to the attention of the other community members.

We are a small community of enthusiasts and should not only adhere to, but also hold each other to, a high standard of conduct. When selling to each other, it is critical that we:

• Accurately describe the item.
• Provide pictures of the current condition of the item.
• Honor agreements that are made, verbal or in writing.
• Not unilaterally change a verbal or written agreement to one’s benefit after items have been shipped

For most of us, we strive to follow these standard principles of honesty in our transactions. I don’t believe that happened here.

None of this would have occurred if the gun received would have been the gun advertised; correspondingly, I would not be posting this if he had reimbursed us according to his promises.

In his January 10, 2025 12:16pm message to me, included above, @Rare Breed stated "I am not deviating from this given I am 100% sure all forum members would agree with me". I find that hard to believe. @Rare Breed may have his opinion, but I have provided objective proof of everything I have stated.

 

[leslie hetrick]

sad, indeed.

 

[Hunting Hitman]

Having just read this post I will allow @Rare Breed respond before jumping in but the photos and emails are concerning.

HH

 

[375er]

Stock looks like a hyena used it for a toothpick.

 

[Hunter-Habib]

I sincerely hope that this is all just a misunderstanding that will get resolved quickly.

@Rare Breed has always been a very solid charactered standup guy, based upon all my interactions with him over the last four years.

 

[375Fox]

I’d like to hear Rare Breed’s side of things, but I’d say if an item is misrepresented it’s on the seller to reimburse all money paid and pay return shipping.

 

[Rare Breed]

Thank you! To be clear, so much of what Franz says and shows is absolutely correct with the following exceptions:
1. attached are pictures TAKEN today…a simple wipe of linseed oil took care of the scratches.
2. an iron with a wet cloth took care of the ding.
3. As noted by Frantz, I IMMEDIATELY agreed no hesitation to take back the rifle with reloading supplies and pay the shipping on it back to me which was $164.
4. There is only one single issue and I still stand by it…Frantz wanted me to also refund the shipping and insurance he paid of $375 and I did not think that was fair. Also there was not only nothing wrong with the reloading supplies, my ad said 100 brass and 100 bullets…the actual supplies I gave him at the same cost as my ad ended up being 379 pieces of brass and 729 bullets so I did not think it fair to pay the shipping back

My points are the only disagreements we had…strictly shipping costs

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Stock looks like a hyena used it for a toothpick.

I was thinking maybe it fell out of the truck?

 

[Rare Breed]

Thank you! To be clear, so much of what Franz says and shows is absolutely correct with the following exceptions:
1. attached are pictures TAKEN today…a simple wipe of linseed oil took care of the scratches.
2. an iron with a wet cloth took care of the ding.
3. As noted by Frantz, I IMMEDIATELY agreed no hesitation to take back the rifle with reloading supplies and pay the shipping on it back to me which was $164.
4. There is only one single issue and I still stand by it…Frantz wanted me to also refund the shipping and insurance he paid of $375 and I did not think that was fair. Also there was not only nothing wrong with the reloading supplies, my ad said 100 brass and 100 bullets…the actual supplies I gave him at the same cost as my ad ended up being 379 pieces of brass and 729 bullets so I did not think it fair to pay the shipping back

My points are the only disagreements we had…strictly shipping costs

Here are todays pictures…you be the judge

 

[Rare Breed]

Frantz please review my responses and respond…am I correct the only issue we had was the first shipping costs and your return supplies only? Did I not do everything else I said in my response guaranteeing the rifle and supplies?

 

[ACE (in CT)]

In my experience, Refunds on Shipping are always/usually/often/sometimes items in dispute. But the way I read the above is that you agreed to reimburse shipping, then changed your mind. Am I not correct in that interpretation?

 

[Rare Breed]

You are not correct and in our phone discussion I made clear that I would reimburse the return shipping cost of the rifle since that was the issue nothing else. I made very clear to Franz I did not think it fair for me to reimburse my shipment cost and insurance out. I want to see if Frantz is honest enough to admit my point here. I obviously should have recorded our phone call. In all my transactions I have had zero problems. I always end up providing more than is in my ad without charging extra. I do not appreciate whatsoever Frantz saying I on purpose misrepresented to him the gun. I freely admit I should have wiped down the scratches and used and iron before shipping…my bad. I have just never bought anything used that has been hunted with that did not have some scratches/dings that easily are fixed. One more time I IMMEDIATELY agreed to take back the gun and supplies no questions asked

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Here are todays pictures…you be the judge

You are showing the top view (north) of fore end and left side (west) but NOT the right side (east). The right side is where the significant damage was located. You may have been able to steam out the dent but that big gouge or cut ... I'd like to see that disappear. I have steamed out some serious dents before and yes it may be possible to raise them flush with the rest of the surface but the grain is still broken. The dent often (usually) will still appear to remain even though the surface is flush.

My opinion, for what it's worth ($0.00) is the damage, particularly the significant gouge to fore end should have been disclosed to the prospective buyer. It's not a crack or any structural or mechanical defect but we are talking about a $20K bespoke rifle. I'm afraid I would have been much hotter under the collar opening that box. Seller clearly had to have known the defects when he put it in the box to send off. And surely he must have known the buyer didn't know about the defects.

As to the ammo: A fella buys a fancy bespoke thumper gun and loading components to make it work. The gun turns out to majorly not be what he thought it was represented to be. Seller says sorry, send it back. Okay, so the buyer is supposed to keep the reloading components for a specialty gun he no longer has? Rifle and components were sold as a package, right? So why should the seller not agree to refund both as well as shipping for both?

 

[Rare Breed]

Incorrect…there were two…one in the cheek piece, you can see it did not 100% come out but certainly not what zfranz showed then the other side where it came out so well you are saying there must be another side missing…the two pictures are of both sides of the stick after linseed oil wipe and iron over a moist cloth

 

[grand veneur]

Here are todays pictures…you be the judge

Since the matter is public, I would like to make a comment about your today's pictures.

The scratches and signs of use are clearly visible and as many of us know, unfortunately some things always looks significantly less pronounced in pictures than in reality. With an iron and oil you can perhaps minimize the damage to the stock, but unfortunately you cannot eliminate it.

 

[BJH65]

Rare Breed made it very clear the rifle had wear and scratches. IMO he certainly didn’t downplay this. The photos by franzfmdavis are extreme closeup photos which certainly amplify the scratches, small dents, wear and tear, etc. I do not believe there was any intent to mislead by Rare Breed. So this is an argument over shipping costs, unnecessary to post IMO. If I had the money I’d buy this double scratches and all.

 

[Fixfire]

Shipping costs issues aside, I too would be pissed if the gun received looked that much different than the pictures originally presented - presale.

 

[swashington]

I don't see why this is on a public post. Report it to the moderators and let them decide it. If you have a dispute (and this is a small dispute), find a way to work it out without demeaning the reputation of another in public.

 

[Rare Breed]

Completely agree! I never represented the rifle was NEW IN BOX. Please everyone go back to my ad! I did say as I do with all my DRs I sent it to JJ who after taking it apart and doing his review said the rifle was perfect. For those that do business with JJ he is all about is everything working to his high standards on the rifle.

 

[Rare Breed]

Here is JJs invoice