Mike, at this point, I'm not taking on the liability of trying to ship items back to you.


I'm not fixing Mike's manufacturer problem for him, on my own time, on my own dime. If he wants to run a business where his manufacturer lies to him, and then he passes those lies onto his customers, he should be prepared to deal with negative feedback. I'm sure his system works great 99% of the time, but it sure didn't this time, and he doesn't really seem to be interested in making it right.

Also, I never said he stole money, I said he will steal money. As in, he stated he will initiate unauthorized credit card charges if I initiate a merchant chargeback. That's not exactly lawful in my state. Hence, stealing. I'm not even getting into the fact that he seems to think its okay to hold my money until I fix his screw-up.

The deal was money for parts. I fulfilled my portion of the bargain. I am still waiting for Mike to do the same.

It seems like what's done is done (in regards to the initial transaction). Couldn't CZP simply send you a return label and schedule a pickup for the return? Once the package is in transit to them, initiate the refund. Yes, there has already been an inconvenience, and yes they have held onto your money, and there is negative feedback. You will get your money back, they will get their part and you can decide to do business with them in the future (highly unlikely it seems). Seems reasonable.

Yes, but then I would be liable for the shipment if it did not arrive to CZP, was damaged in shipping, got lost by the mailguy, etc. I'm not letting Mike shift the merchant's shipping risk from his pile of problems to my pile of problems. For obvious reasons related to what I've seen of Mike's business practices, I am unwilling to take any additional risks in our transaction.

Well, my dog isn't in this fight but I am curious to know EXACTLY what you want to happen. Get Mike to release all liability on the return (assuming there's no funny business) and be done with. Or are you asking for some type of monetary compensation on top of the return?

If Mike can purchase a new Berk catted frontpipe from another source for close to what I paid him, and have it shipped to me before November, and he still makes money, shouldn't I ask for that?


Because that's what I am asking for.

Seems like a different transaction all together (the transaction between Mike and other source). Getting new Berk catted front pipe shipped to you before November, at no extra cost to you is what needs to be done. That's what you paid for. Money for parts. I may have misinterpreted something, however this is what I gather.

You're assuming that Mike and I had some agreement as to where he would source the frontpipe from; however, we had no specific term as to the source of the frontpipe. I don't care if he sources it from Berk, CSG or Lucifer, Prince of Darkness, the frontpipes are all the same and cost roughly the same, because the frontpipes are fungible goods.

At the end of the day, Mike is electing to preserve his profits via going only with Berk at the expense of my customer experience through unreasonable delay for a commonly available part. That's his choice to make, but I'm not sure that it shows the best business judgment or customer relation skills.

I understand you now. I initially thought that you wanted the profit delta from Mike's transaction with another vendor. Nonetheless, I hope that you two are able to come to a mutual agreement that satisfies each of you. Good luck

I've dealt with CZP for years and spent a considerable amount of money with them. You don't sound like you have a grasp on SOP's and are trying to fault a vendor.

I appreciate that you have an ongoing business relationship with CZP, but could you please elaborate on what I'm not understanding about SOPs and vendor customer service standards.

I want to start a User Feedback thread on ATaraxias warning other vendors not to do business with him?

I'm a real unreasonable jerk, somebody call the internet police.

I pay vendors for products, and then, I actually expect them to be true to what they told me during the sale. Apparently, some customers dislike being lied to about product availability, especially when the product is currently in-stock with other vendors for the same price.

Did you physically call other vendors to see if it was actually in hand? Almost everything automotive related is drop shipped now a days. They probably looked at turn 14 or something and it said "available", when really, it's not and there is an issue. Wouldn't be the first time that's happened

So, now that we have heard all the "evidence", in the charge of theft (the literally kind) in the online forum degree how does the court find the defendant?