|
Author
|
Topic: Refund Blackmail?
|
Gerald Santana
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1060
From: Cottage Grove OR
Registered: Dec 2010
|
posted October 26, 2013 12:07 PM
I recently sold a film to a collector that then said the print was incomplete when he received it. He stated that although it was incomplete, he wanted to keep what he had but thought that a refund was in order.
This was a mint print that I never fully checked and valuable. That was my first mistake by not checking it completely. Second, I believed him when he told me it was missing about 20 min. of footage so I went along with giving him a partial refund.
Then, I read that the film in question was also released in a 90 min. version so, my instinct told me to give him a complete refund instead so that I could inspect the footage. I told him this, please send back the film for a complete refund.
He does not want to send me the film and instead insists on a partial refund only and the to top it all of he closes his email with this:
"if you do not send the refund, I will never do
business with you again, and I will advise my other
collector friends not to do business with you."
This kind of stuff puts me in such a bad mood, at least here I can talk about it. To be perfectly frank, I don't care if the films ever sell or not. I check everything I have as best I can but, I do make mistakes and am willing to correct it with a refund on a return if there is a discrepancy in the listing but, no more partial refunds out there for anyone. Full refund only but you must return the film.
--------------------
http://lostandoutofprintfilms.blogspot.com/
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Osi Osgood
Film God
Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted October 26, 2013 12:41 PM
Good advice from Brad.
Most definitely, screen the print beforehand, as, many features were issued on super 8 slightly edited. For instance, there were the $X400ft versions of "My name is Nobody" or "Warlords of Atlantis", and then, there were all those ABC films which, except for a few, "Like "Take the Money and Run" or "Tom Sawyer"), were all edited down to a 5X400ft version, (and heck, you could put those versions on 4X400ft, as those 5X400ft versions never filled the whole 400ft reel when issued).
So, know the product. I think the person was shadey, personally, and (if the person is a fellow forum member), I would suggest that this person do his history and find out if this was the full unedited feature ...
Because Gerald could well have "outed" the buyer if he had wished to, so this certainly shows Gerald's honesty. Good man, Gerald.
--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gerald Santana
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1060
From: Cottage Grove OR
Registered: Dec 2010
|
posted October 27, 2013 03:46 AM
At the moment, instead of film, I want to invest in the truth. I'll offer the buyer of the film $1000 to return it so that I can see my mistake again. It's just money, and completely meaningless to me in this scenario.
Either way, I'd just love to know the truth and close this chapter. So, I'm willing to give the buyer his refund and pay for my error. Or did he try to pull a fast one on me because I hadn't screened the entire film?
At the moment, I can not believe this but, he refuses a complete refund so that I can see the print...then, return it right back to him! You can't go make a copy of the print at Kinko's so, my confusion has turned into suspicion as he refuses to part with the film he is now saying he paid too much for, yet does not want to return it for more money!!
I'll gladly pay up and shut up if I'm wrong but, I think this is actually a much harder to find 90 min. broadcast print. He wants to keep it and get more out of the deal by demanding only a partial refund. The film is expensive because there isn't one you can just go and get, and in mint condition. He's refusing to take any pictures of it, nor return the film for inspection and only demanding a partial refund. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
P.S. Dino, I was hoping to attend your program on the 14th in L.A. but, will be at a reunion with friends that can't find another date to meet instead. Please bring the 28mm to Berkeley, we'd love to see it, I'll drive!
--------------------
http://lostandoutofprintfilms.blogspot.com/
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gerald Santana
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1060
From: Cottage Grove OR
Registered: Dec 2010
|
posted October 27, 2013 12:24 PM
Dominque you are right...I found the evidence to show that he was in fact trying to extort money from me and LIED through his teeth to his peers without batting an eyelash. Plus, he refuses to take a picture of the print or return it for a complete refund and $200 extra dollars!
This mans name is DAVE AQUINO. I should not post many more details about him and what happened as I prepared to file a motion in court. I will make his name known so that others will beware however, to publicly apologize to the collectors at the 16mm film talk for using profanity while I was upset.
DAN CAPRIO only offered inflammatory replies and blind criticism, 90% of it was directed at him. I will now ignore him, to avoid getting so angry and if anyone has his ebay ID please, PM the information so that I could block him. You should see the thread on 16mm film talk if it still exists...I do have screen captures of what was said as I build my case.
Don't be surprised if we hear from them here, trying to say I'm the one that is wrong here and that I still owe him $250! All that despite undeniable proof that the film I sent was complete. Without regret, I will leave filmtalk however, continue to maintain public visibility here on the 8mm Forum, and in a positive way.
More later...and thanks for the support, I appreciate it.
[ October 28, 2013, 04:20 AM: Message edited by: Gerald Santana ]
--------------------
http://lostandoutofprintfilms.blogspot.com/
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
David M. Ballew
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 113
From: Burbank, CA USA
Registered: Nov 2009
|
posted October 28, 2013 01:54 AM
A few months ago, I sold a truly mint-condition Standard 8 silent 200-foot digest of "The Incredible Shrinking Man" on eBay. The box and the print looked brand-new, no exaggeration.
The buyer turned out to be a fledgling collector who had only recently acquired her first-ever 8mm projector.
The package was delayed in reaching her owing to a snafu at the Post Office. She lives here in the Valley and I sent it to her First Class, but the USPS routed it through a sorting center in Missouri, of all places, so it reached her over a week late!
At last she got the print, watched it... and then sent me an irate e-mail complaining about the truncated print. Seems she had somehow been expecting a feature-length, sound copy of the film.
I gently explained a little bit about the history and nature of 8mm digests, suggesting that she should actually be very pleased with the one she had received, one of Castle's finest. To her credit, once she understood the situation, she was very friendly and conciliatory in her follow-up e-mails.
My sincere hope is that "Shrinking Man" was a gateway to the world of 8mm collecting for this young lady. Despite the misunderstanding, she struck me as a decent and sincere person going through a bit of a learning curve in connection with our hobby.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gerald Santana
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1060
From: Cottage Grove OR
Registered: Dec 2010
|
posted October 28, 2013 03:53 PM
I agree Winbert, I was being extorted for money, that was rightfully mine. The film in question was a very rare documentary. I checked the film on the bench with a complete cleaning.
I have now spoken with the original owner of the film and this is indeed a complete 90 min. print.
"For many years the film was released on VHS in an edited 90-minute form, extracted from a TV broadcast copy made in the 1980s, which itself was a broadacst of the RCA Spectravision magnetic disc version, a format popular in the late 70s, early 80s. Several scenes were removed and the audio had several pitch problems and dropouts, due to different film stocks and original film regions."
That is, the film was released at 101 min. on 35mm and there were some 16mm prints made however, the print that I sold was probably the print used for the VHS film transfer, or one of the very, very few issued for that purpose. The color just popped, this film again was in Great color, mint to near mint condition when I checked it on the bench, date code 1983.
Dave G. Aquino of Baltimore, Maryland will have to relinquish the film to the court that will inspect the film for us once I file my application for discovery or face charges. If this is indeed a 90 min. version, as all evidence proves, my extortion and defamation charges will proceed. Others in this matter may be summoned or I may take civil action with Dan Caprio as well. Offering a complete refund for a return to check my mistake is not against the law, Coercion, Extortion and Defamation is.
--------------------
http://lostandoutofprintfilms.blogspot.com/
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Aquino
Junior
Posts: 2
From: Baltimore, MD, USA
Registered: Nov 2013
|
posted November 02, 2013 04:26 PM
OK, here I am, the buyer (beware) Dave Aquino:
Since Gerald persists in slandering me in this forum (as well
as in the "16mmFilmTalk" forum), I feel the need to respond
to this and defend my reputation;
There are 2 Sides to every story; please listen to mine:
I already got a taste of Gerald's profanity (which I won't repeat here) in a private e-mail;
HERE IS THE FULL STORY:
Gerald Santana posted for sale a "beautiful LPP original 16mm print
on Mylar stock" of The Who documentary THE KIDS ARE ALRIGHT
@ $800.
I paid him the $800. but when the film arrived, it was missing
the last reel (roughly 30 minutes), was Not LPP but slightly faded
Eastman, and was Not Mylar stock.
(the color isn't too bad, but I could Not find the letters "LPP"
on the sprocket edge; perhaps they are obscured by a sprocket
hole)
The film runs 108 minutes (you can check IMDB or Leonard Maltin's TV movieguide or the official DVD release) but what he sent me runs only 60 - 70 minutes
(I have an old print of Kids are Alright that has Vinegar and has also turned purple! that runs the full feature's running time of 108 min.)
What Gerald sent me are two not-full 1600 foot reels,
Total running time about 60 - 70 minutes, so the 3rd reel
(about the last 30 - 40 minutes of the feature) is missing.
Now, I need to Keep the 2 reels Gerald sent me, because they contain
basically all the footage I want of The Who; also because 16mm
prints of this are as rare as hen's teeth;
It's a basically nice print with all the footage I myself want;
I can live without the last 30-40 minutes, which contains the
Monterey Pop footage and some other songs from the 1970's
I discussed this with Santana and he SUGGESTED and AGREED to a price reduction refund of $250. because of the missing footage
(I have the E-mail thread to prove this)
2 weeks went by without a refund so I E-mailed him about it and
now he says he wants me to return the film first before he'll
refund anything.
He wants to "examine the film first"...you mean to tell me,
he doesn't know what he shipped? Of course he does!
I find the idea of returning the film, very questionable...
I mean, this is the first time I've ever dealt with him,
and I feel it's risky because I'll probably never see the
print again, or the refund
The bottom line is: he AGREED to a partial refund of $250. and
now wants to change it; he now wants me to return the footage
that I want to keep, in exchange for a Full refund
I told him to send the refund he agreed on, or I will never do
business with him again and advise my friends not to also
I do not want to make a federal case out of this;
it's not worth my time and aggravation
I'm keeping the footage he sent me, as I said, it's all I really
need from this film; but I think a partial price reduction was
in order, which he AGREED to at first
I'm sure if I send the film back for him to inspect, I'll never see the film again Or the refund.
if he doesn't send a refund I'll just chalk it up to experience.
I mean, there's no way I can force him to honor the refund
he suggested, if he's not going to honor it
As far as a "condensed 90 minute version" of this film,
I can find no reference to this on the IMDB or anywhere;
the running time on everything I've ever seen on this film
is 108 minutes, which was the running time in the theaters
when it was originally released, not 90 min. or 70 min.
As far as "Dave Aquino is a crook and a liar etc.etc.",
NO I am not a crook or a liar; the above is the Total Truth;
I have an excellent reputation among fellow film collectors and
dealers, going back to the Big Reel days; if you want just ask
ones I've done business with:
Bob Knight, Dan Caprio, Steve Sigel, Dan Lail, Rich Burgess,
Al Bielski, Veto Stasiunaitis, Phil Johnson, Richard Jannetta,
Greg Luce (Sinister Cinema) all will vouch for my integrity.
As I said, it's not worth my time, money or aggravation to
pursue this any further, as I know I'll never get the refund
that was promised me.
Dave Aquino
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
