New scam from Brooklyn dealer

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Don Wiss, May 4, 2005.

  1. Don Wiss

    Guest

    On Thu, 5 May 2005 18:14:30 -0400, "Peter A. Stavrakoglou"
    <> wrote:

    >"Ron Hunter" <> wrote in message
    >news:WCuee.9996$...
    >>C Wright wrote:
    >>> On 5/5/05 3:51 AM, in article d5cmre$lgi$, "Bernard
    >>> Rother" <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Now I'm starting to get a little worried. On 22 April I placed an order
    >>>>with B&H for a Sigma 18-125 lens for $323,00 ( incl. postage to South
    >>>>Africa ) The following day the money was deducted from my credit card.
    >>>>YESTERDAY, 10 days later, they ask me to email a copy of both sides of
    >>>>the card to them for verification. I would have thought you need
    >>>>verification first and THEN make the deduction.
    >>>>My fingers are crossed !
    >>>>Bernard
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Don't worry, if you are dealing with B&H they will ship the order! It is
    >>> standard practice for B&H to hit your credit card immediately, often even
    >>> on
    >>> back ordered products. This is somewhat counter to the practice of many
    >>> other merchants to not hit your credit card until your order ships (at
    >>> least
    >>> that is what they say!). B&H, however, is up front about this - at least
    >>> they have told me that they will charge the card right away. And, they
    >>> have
    >>> always shipped the goods!
    >>> Chuck
    >>>

    >> It is generally considered a suspicious business practice to charge a card
    >> until the product is ready to ship. They CAN run a 'preapproval',
    >> however, which will expire in a few days if the actual transaction doesn't
    >> happen.

    >
    >It also might be illegal.
    >


    They fully disclose it pre-purchase. If you don't like it,
    despite the generally good reputation held by the rest ot their
    operation, there are other shops.

    If you'd like to cite an applicable law disallowing
    prepayment, I'd be interested in seeing it.
     
    , May 10, 2005
    #21
    1. Advertising

  2. <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > They fully disclose it pre-purchase. If you don't like it,
    > despite the generally good reputation held by the rest ot their
    > operation, there are other shops.
    >
    > If you'd like to cite an applicable law disallowing
    > prepayment, I'd be interested in seeing it.


    Take a chill pill, I merely suggested that it might be a violation of law.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, May 10, 2005
    #22
    1. Advertising

  3. Don Wiss

    MarkH Guest

    "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    news:e60ge.323$:

    ><> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> They fully disclose it pre-purchase. If you don't like it,
    >> despite the generally good reputation held by the rest ot their
    >> operation, there are other shops.
    >>
    >> If you'd like to cite an applicable law disallowing
    >> prepayment, I'd be interested in seeing it.

    >
    > Take a chill pill, I merely suggested that it might be a violation of
    > law.


    I too would be interested in knowing if you can back up you suggestion!

    What I mean is that it seems you are suggesting that something might be
    illegal; if it is not illegal then it seems bad to suggest such a thing.

    I am not too sure why you are getting so defensive about someone
    questioning your suggestion about this practise being possibly illegal. Is
    it a case of what you say cannot be questioned here? If this is the case
    then you would be better off not making suggestions without knowing the
    facts.


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
    "There are 10 types of people, those that
    understand binary and those that don't"
     
    MarkH, May 10, 2005
    #23
  4. Don Wiss

    james Guest

    In article <2Vwee.9408$>,
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou <> wrote:

    >> It is generally considered a suspicious business practice to charge a card
    >> until the product is ready to ship. They CAN run a 'preapproval',
    >> however, which will expire in a few days if the actual transaction doesn't
    >> happen.

    >
    >It also might be illegal.


    It could conceivably cross the line into fraud if a merchant charges for
    an item that he knows won't ever be delivered. But there is enough
    reasonable assurance in a back-order situation for this to not be a
    problem.

    But there could hardly be a valid law with language that made it illegal
    for a merchant to charge in advance for goods or services. Imagine
    yourself being on the other end of that law.
     
    james, May 10, 2005
    #24
  5. <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > >It also might be illegal.
    > >

    >
    > They fully disclose it pre-purchase. If you don't like it,
    > despite the generally good reputation held by the rest ot their
    > operation, there are other shops.
    >
    > If you'd like to cite an applicable law disallowing
    > prepayment, I'd be interested in seeing it.


    Of course it is not illegal. There are many companies that require
    pre-payment when you order, even when the ship date is in the future.
    Sometimes it's because the company doesn't even go out and get the item
    until someone buys it.
     
    Steven M. Scharf, May 10, 2005
    #25
  6. Don Wiss

    james Guest

    james, May 10, 2005
    #26
  7. Don Wiss

    james Guest

    In article <xjgee.4157$dH6.658@trndny07>, SamSez <> wrote:

    >I buy from B&H all the time -- but only on the days of the week when they're in
    >Manhattan....


    My mistake, sorry.
     
    james, May 10, 2005
    #27
  8. On Thu, 05 May 2005 03:22:05 GMT, in rec.photo.digital , "SamSez"
    <> in <xjgee.4157$dH6.658@trndny07> wrote:

    >
    >"james" <> wrote in message
    >news:Fyfee.15718$_K.4954@fed1read03...
    >> In article <>,
    >> Don Wiss <donwiss@no_spam.com> wrote:
    >>
    >> >From the e-mail link at the bottom of my web page of Brooklyn Store Fronts,
    >> >I get an e-mail every couple days. Often from people that have already
    >> >placed an order from a Brooklyn dealer, then afterwards do some web
    >> >searching.

    >>
    >> You paint "Brooklyn dealers" with a pretty broad brush. Some of the
    >> best online shopping experiences I've ever had were from an outfit in
    >> Brooklyn, B&H.
    >>

    >
    >I buy from B&H all the time -- but only on the days of the week when they're in
    >Manhattan....


    All six, right? (The other day they are probably in Brooklyn, but they
    are closed anyway, so it does not matter.)



    --
    Matt Silberstein

    All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
    a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
    there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
    end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
    or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.
     
    Matt Silberstein, May 10, 2005
    #28
  9. Don Wiss

    MarkH Guest

    "Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in news:cr6ge.607
    $:

    >
    ><> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >> >It also might be illegal.
    >> >

    >>
    >> They fully disclose it pre-purchase. If you don't like it,
    >> despite the generally good reputation held by the rest ot their
    >> operation, there are other shops.
    >>
    >> If you'd like to cite an applicable law disallowing
    >> prepayment, I'd be interested in seeing it.

    >
    > Of course it is not illegal. There are many companies that require
    > pre-payment when you order, even when the ship date is in the future.
    > Sometimes it's because the company doesn't even go out and get the item
    > until someone buys it.


    In fact Canon have a lens that you can buy, but you have to pay for it
    before they build it. This means that you part with your money for an item
    that does not exist.


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
    "There are 10 types of people, those that
    understand binary and those that don't"
     
    MarkH, May 10, 2005
    #29
  10. "MarkH" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:c2ge.1503$...
    > "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    > news:e60ge.323$:
    >
    >><> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>>
    >>> They fully disclose it pre-purchase. If you don't like it,
    >>> despite the generally good reputation held by the rest ot their
    >>> operation, there are other shops.
    >>>
    >>> If you'd like to cite an applicable law disallowing
    >>> prepayment, I'd be interested in seeing it.

    >>
    >> Take a chill pill, I merely suggested that it might be a violation of
    >> law.

    >
    > I too would be interested in knowing if you can back up you suggestion!
    >
    > What I mean is that it seems you are suggesting that something might be
    > illegal; if it is not illegal then it seems bad to suggest such a thing.
    >
    > I am not too sure why you are getting so defensive about someone
    > questioning your suggestion about this practise being possibly illegal.
    > Is
    > it a case of what you say cannot be questioned here? If this is the case
    > then you would be better off not making suggestions without knowing the
    > facts.


    You need a pill too! It was merely a SUGGESTION, no statement that it was
    gospel truth. There are 50 states with thousands of local governing
    authorities in the USA, to know all consumer laws is impossible. Again, it
    was only a SUGGESTION, get it? BTW, credit card companies such as VISA
    prohibit merchants from charging before shipping.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, May 10, 2005
    #30
  11. Don Wiss

    MarkH Guest

    "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    news:grage.423$:

    > You need a pill too! It was merely a SUGGESTION, no statement that it
    > was gospel truth. There are 50 states with thousands of local
    > governing authorities in the USA, to know all consumer laws is
    > impossible. Again, it was only a SUGGESTION, get it? BTW, credit
    > card companies such as VISA prohibit merchants from charging before
    > shipping.


    Too often people make comments about what they think is the case, when it
    is completely wrong.

    I know credit card companies have certain rules, but that is different to
    what is legal or illegal. In other words: violation of credit card company
    policy is not the same as breaking the law.

    Once again: If you can't take your suggestions being questioned then you
    need to stop making those suggestions in a public forum. Especially when
    you incorrectly suggest something you can expect someone to call you on it.

    You have incorrectly suggested something and been called on it, your
    response is to criticise the posters who are providing the correct info.
    This is not a very good way to behave. Shouting that your falsehoods were
    only a suggestion is pretty poor IMO.

    My SUGGESTION:
    Accept that you have no basis for your suggestion and stop being so damn
    defensive about it.


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
    "There are 10 types of people, those that
    understand binary and those that don't"
     
    MarkH, May 11, 2005
    #31
  12. "MarkH" <> wrote in message
    news:RAkge.28807$...
    > "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    > news:grage.423$:
    >
    >> You need a pill too! It was merely a SUGGESTION, no statement that it
    >> was gospel truth. There are 50 states with thousands of local
    >> governing authorities in the USA, to know all consumer laws is
    >> impossible. Again, it was only a SUGGESTION, get it? BTW, credit
    >> card companies such as VISA prohibit merchants from charging before
    >> shipping.

    >
    > Too often people make comments about what they think is the case, when it
    > is completely wrong.
    >
    > I know credit card companies have certain rules, but that is different to
    > what is legal or illegal. In other words: violation of credit card
    > company
    > policy is not the same as breaking the law.
    >
    > Once again: If you can't take your suggestions being questioned then you
    > need to stop making those suggestions in a public forum. Especially when
    > you incorrectly suggest something you can expect someone to call you on
    > it.
    >
    > You have incorrectly suggested something and been called on it, your
    > response is to criticise the posters who are providing the correct info.
    > This is not a very good way to behave. Shouting that your falsehoods were
    > only a suggestion is pretty poor IMO.
    >
    > My SUGGESTION:
    > Accept that you have no basis for your suggestion and stop being so damn
    > defensive about it.


    Pardon me, but my suggestion may certainly turn out to be correct. Of
    course since I made the suggestion then it would be incumbant upon me to
    prove my point but it has not been disproven either. As I noted there are
    literally thousands of governing authorities that can and have enacted
    consumer laws and regulations. To know what all of these laws and
    regulations are is not possible. It is possible that in some jurisdiction
    this practice is illegal.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, May 11, 2005
    #32
  13. "james" <> wrote in message
    news:xk6ge.26394$fI.24706@fed1read05...

    > It could conceivably cross the line into fraud if a merchant charges for
    > an item that he knows won't ever be delivered. But there is enough
    > reasonable assurance in a back-order situation for this to not be a
    > problem.


    I believe that there are already federal laws that say that if a merchant
    takes an order for an item that it turns out cannot be delivered within 30
    days, the merchant must offer the customer the opportunity to cancel the
    order and pay nothing--not even the cost of a stamp or phone call. I have
    several times ordered something and, a while later, gotten a post card with
    a message along the following lines:

    Dear Customer,

    The left-handed blivet that you ordered is on back-order at the
    manufacturer.
    The estimated ship date is July 17. If you wish to wait for the
    merchandise to
    arrive, you need not take any action. If you wish to cancel the order,
    call
    1-888-PLS-STOP and mention order number 314159.
     
    Andrew Koenig, May 11, 2005
    #33
  14. Don Wiss

    MarkH Guest

    "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    news:m7lge.681$:

    >> My SUGGESTION:
    >> Accept that you have no basis for your suggestion and stop being so
    >> damn defensive about it.

    >
    > Pardon me, but my suggestion may certainly turn out to be correct. Of
    > course since I made the suggestion then it would be incumbant upon me
    > to prove my point but it has not been disproven either. As I noted
    > there are literally thousands of governing authorities that can and
    > have enacted consumer laws and regulations. To know what all of these
    > laws and regulations are is not possible. It is possible that in some
    > jurisdiction this practice is illegal.


    It is also possible that this practice is perfectly legal everywhere.
    In fact I can think of many cases where it would be necessary for a
    merchant to be paid before they get the goods in, if the practice was
    illegal then they would have trouble operating.

    I agree that if you want to assert some possibility that the practice is
    illegal then it IS incumbent upon you to provide some basis for that
    theory. In fact I don't believe it is possible for anyone to prove you
    wrong. Even if I could find a legal statute that states that charging a
    customer before supplying goods is allowed, you could say that there
    could be individual states where there is another rule that forbids it
    (despite providing no evidence of that).

    Do you really think that Canon will manufacture a 1200mm lens for you
    without receiving payment first? You must pay for it before they start
    manufacture, otherwise you could change your mind and they could have a
    lens with no buyer. They don't sell that lens every day (or week, or
    month, or even year).

    Do you think that an importer will track down a rare car worth several
    million and buy it for you then hope you will pay them once they have it
    in their possession? I am sure they can legally ask you to pay for it
    before they have to pay for it, especially if they have no way of
    affording the purchase themselves.

    If a chronic bad debtor wants to buy something from me and I insist on
    receiving payment before ordering the item, I am sure that I am not
    acting illegally.

    Do you have ANYTHING that backs up your theory? I have plenty of basis
    for believing my point of view (including the fact that some large
    retailers use the practise), do you have ANY basis at all for your
    suggestion?


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
    "There are 10 types of people, those that
    understand binary and those that don't"
     
    MarkH, May 11, 2005
    #34
  15. Don Wiss

    Guest

    On Tue, 10 May 2005 12:56:52 GMT, MarkH <> wrote:

    >"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    >news:e60ge.323$:
    >
    >><> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>>
    >>> They fully disclose it pre-purchase. If you don't like it,
    >>> despite the generally good reputation held by the rest ot their
    >>> operation, there are other shops.
    >>>
    >>> If you'd like to cite an applicable law disallowing
    >>> prepayment, I'd be interested in seeing it.

    >>
    >> Take a chill pill, I merely suggested that it might be a violation of
    >> law.


    Only pompous asholes think they're so cool thay can use inane
    phrases like "chill pill".

    >
    >I too would be interested in knowing if you can back up you suggestion!
    >
    >What I mean is that it seems you are suggesting that something might be
    >illegal; if it is not illegal then it seems bad to suggest such a thing.
    >
    >I am not too sure why you are getting so defensive about someone
    >questioning your suggestion about this practise being possibly illegal. Is
    >it a case of what you say cannot be questioned here? If this is the case
    >then you would be better off not making suggestions without knowing the
    >facts.
     
    , May 12, 2005
    #35
  16. Don Wiss

    Guest

    On Wed, 11 May 2005 06:28:39 -0400, "Peter A. Stavrakoglou"
    <> wrote:

    >"MarkH" <> wrote in message
    >news:RAkge.28807$...
    >> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    >> news:grage.423$:
    >>
    >>> You need a pill too! It was merely a SUGGESTION, no statement that it
    >>> was gospel truth. There are 50 states with thousands of local
    >>> governing authorities in the USA, to know all consumer laws is
    >>> impossible. Again, it was only a SUGGESTION, get it? BTW, credit
    >>> card companies such as VISA prohibit merchants from charging before
    >>> shipping.

    >>
    >> Too often people make comments about what they think is the case, when it
    >> is completely wrong.
    >>
    >> I know credit card companies have certain rules, but that is different to
    >> what is legal or illegal. In other words: violation of credit card
    >> company
    >> policy is not the same as breaking the law.
    >>
    >> Once again: If you can't take your suggestions being questioned then you
    >> need to stop making those suggestions in a public forum. Especially when
    >> you incorrectly suggest something you can expect someone to call you on
    >> it.
    >>
    >> You have incorrectly suggested something and been called on it, your
    >> response is to criticise the posters who are providing the correct info.
    >> This is not a very good way to behave. Shouting that your falsehoods were
    >> only a suggestion is pretty poor IMO.
    >>
    >> My SUGGESTION:
    >> Accept that you have no basis for your suggestion and stop being so damn
    >> defensive about it.

    >
    >Pardon me, but my suggestion may certainly turn out to be correct.


    Keep digging.

    > Of
    >course since I made the suggestion then it would be incumbant upon me to
    >prove my point but it has not been disproven either. As I noted there are
    >literally thousands of governing authorities that can and have enacted
    >consumer laws and regulations. To know what all of these laws and
    >regulations are is not possible. It is possible that in some jurisdiction
    >this practice is illegal.


    And if your aunt had balls, she'd be your uncle.

    >
     
    , May 12, 2005
    #36
  17. <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 10 May 2005 12:56:52 GMT, MarkH <> wrote:
    >
    >>"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    >>news:e60ge.323$:
    >>
    >>><> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>>
    >>>> They fully disclose it pre-purchase. If you don't like it,
    >>>> despite the generally good reputation held by the rest ot their
    >>>> operation, there are other shops.
    >>>>
    >>>> If you'd like to cite an applicable law disallowing
    >>>> prepayment, I'd be interested in seeing it.
    >>>
    >>> Take a chill pill, I merely suggested that it might be a violation of
    >>> law.

    >
    > Only pompous asholes think they're so cool thay can use inane
    > phrases like "chill pill".


    I won't resort to childish insults like you, suffice it to say that you've
    demonstrated your lack of intelligent thought on this one.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, May 12, 2005
    #37
  18. <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > And if your aunt had balls, she'd be your uncle.


    And she would have two more than you do.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, May 12, 2005
    #38
  19. Don Wiss

    Guest

    On Wed, 11 May 2005 22:22:10 -0400, "Peter A. Stavrakoglou"
    <> wrote:

    ><> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Tue, 10 May 2005 12:56:52 GMT, MarkH <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    >>>news:e60ge.323$:
    >>>
    >>>><> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> They fully disclose it pre-purchase. If you don't like it,
    >>>>> despite the generally good reputation held by the rest ot their
    >>>>> operation, there are other shops.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If you'd like to cite an applicable law disallowing
    >>>>> prepayment, I'd be interested in seeing it.
    >>>>
    >>>> Take a chill pill, I merely suggested that it might be a violation of
    >>>> law.

    >>
    >> Only pompous asholes think they're so cool thay can use inane
    >> phrases like "chill pill".

    >
    >I won't resort to childish insults like you, suffice it to say that you've
    >demonstrated your lack of intelligent thought on this one.
    >


    No more so that your trite use of "chill pill" to emphasize
    your superiority.
     
    , May 13, 2005
    #39
  20. Don Wiss

    Guest

    On Wed, 11 May 2005 22:24:00 -0400, "Peter A. Stavrakoglou"
    <> wrote:

    ><> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>
    >> And if your aunt had balls, she'd be your uncle.

    >
    >And she would have two more than you do.
    >


    No, she'd be your aunt, with balls.
     
    , May 13, 2005
    #40
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Don Wiss

    Today's Brooklyn Camera Dealer Pictures

    Don Wiss, Nov 23, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    495
    Frank Calidonna
    Nov 24, 2003
  2. Don Wiss
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    363
    Howard McCollister
    Dec 13, 2004
  3. Don Wiss

    More Brooklyn Camera Dealer Store Front Pictures

    Don Wiss, Jan 13, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    616
  4. Peter A Stavrakoglou

    New scam from Brooklyn dealer

    Peter A Stavrakoglou, May 6, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    307
    Peter A Stavrakoglou
    May 6, 2005
  5. Don Wiss

    25 new Brooklyn camera dealer pictures

    Don Wiss, Sep 4, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    23
    Views:
    589
    Mike Jacoubowsky
    Sep 10, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page