[time-nuts] Warning: HP oscillators on eBay from todoelmondo (Ray Mahoney)

[David Kirkby]

Joe Geller wrote:
> David,
> 
> 	It is understandable that you are disappointed that it turns out this seller is offering the 10811 - 60111 version instead of the 10811 A model that you were looking for.  But if you look at your question to him objectively, I think one can reasonably see that he took your question with regard to the output frequency.  
> 
> from the link you cited to: "Q: Hi, Can you confirm it is a 10MHz HP 10811A - have you checked to see if 10MHz is present? I can see the 10811 in the picture, but it looks like a list of numbers folllows this, and not the letter A I'm converned this is perhaps a special, at an odd freqency, and not the standard 10MHz 10811A. Is there any where it actually says 10811A on the package? Can you give me a price to ship to the UK. Address would be Department of Medical Physics Mallet Place Engineering Building University College London London WC1E 6BT England 
>  Apr-04-05 
>   A: The 10mhz output was tested with a oscilloscope. It is not a special. Shipping to you business address is $32.00US. We also have a HP10811-60111 we can send you for the same ending auction price. Good luck bidding ---Todoelmondo "

Yes, I see you point, but as someone else pointed out, he did say he 
ALSO had an HP 10811-60111.

Whilst I have not posted it here before, here is part of an email I sent 
him within two minutes of paying for the item via Paypal.

* Hi,
* I have sent you payment for this. Please ensure it
* is the HP10811A and not the HP10811-60111, which you
* said in an email you also had."

I think that makes it pretty clear I do not want part number HP 
10811-60111. So if he felt these oscillators were all the same (and I 
accept he may have done so), he should have clarified it then, before 
sending it across the Atlantic.

> 	Most eBay surplus electronics seller have little knowledge about such matters as the fine differences between the stability of an "A" model versus a -60111 version 

I accept that, but it should be pretty blinking clear I was not wanting 
10811-60111.

> While it is certainly informative that you have told those in the group who may not have been aware, that there is a difference between the two models, your continued public attack of this individual, in my opinion, is not appropriate in this or any other public forum.  You may have a bona fide dispute with him (I doubt it, especially since you recognized that it was probably not an "A" model), but that can be more properly handled by an eBay dispute forum 

I'm well aware eBay sellers often keep the one picture for many items. 
It is not right unless they state it (in my personal opinion), but I'm 
aware of it. In fact, that is what he told me he does. In fact, the same 
picture is used again.

The eBay dispute forum has been tried - their Square Trade process. I 
did not choose the option of paying money to have a "SquareTrader" look 
at the problem (which would be more cost to me), but  used an automated 
system where they would send him emails over a period of 4 days, asking 
him to discuss that matter with me via their web site.

He has failed to response to that Squaretrade process, as he has failed 
to respond to continued private emails, international phone calls where 
I have left a message on his voicebox. I sent a FAX which I sent to his 
work which simply asked him to get in touch if he was having problems 
via email.

Yet he is clearly not unwell, as he is finding time to auction other 
items. (Another oscillator and a Textronix scope last time I looked).

> or in a worst case in a U.S. Small Claims court.  

I'm in the UK, so US courts are not a sensible option for me.

> I find it quite disgusting and unprofessional that you would not only attempt to destroy his business, but further publish his work place and work address over a matter of less than a $100 hobby purchase gone wrong.

With carriage, it is $121 or so.

I have tried to be reasonable with him, even suggesting he auction it 
again, and I'd post it on from the UK for him to the seller.

I've said I'll keep both if he send me on the other, and I'll pay him 
another $50. What I not willing to do is pay the carriage costs in 
returning something I made very clear I never wanted.

I feel I have been most reasonable with the guy, but it is clear to me 
he has realised the cost to rectify the problem is not insignificant. 
The two-way carriage costs on this will be around 70% the cost of the 
item. But I feel I'd made it very clear I did not want the HP 10811-60111.

To me, many people buy things for hobbies. Some companies only sell 
things for hobbies - model aircraft for example, but if their practices 
are poor, (as his are), then it is not unreasonable for them to be named 
in this way.

Feel free to continue to discuss it privately with me if you wish. I 
have set the reply address to myself only.

-- 
David Kirkby,
G8WRB

Please check out http://www.g8wrb.org/
of if you live in Essex http://www.southminster-branch-line.org.uk/