8mm Forum: Refund Blackmail?

This is topic Refund Blackmail? in forum General Yak at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=002826

Posted by Gerald Santana (Member # 2362) on 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.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on October 26, 2013, 12:21 PM:

Unfortunately there is no way to weed these sort of buyers out. If he is truly angry about the situation, he could always cut out 20 minutes of the movie and return the rest to you. Then he gets all of his money back and screws you with an incomplete print.

All I can recommend is to always screen the prints in their entirety before shipping. A footage count (or running time of each reel) is also handy. To really protect yourself, videotape the screen on the last performance of the film before shipping. This prevents someone from doing a print swap on you, where they keep your mint condition print and send you back one with scratches, splices or other wear.

Likewise when buying a print, videotape you opening the box and pulling the reels out. This way there is proof that only 5 of the 6 reels were in the box, etc.

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on October 26, 2013, 12:27 PM:

Gerald

It sounds to me like the buyer may be up to something shady. I had a similar thing happen to me on ebay. The buyer insed there was a reels missing fro the film. I told him it was impossible because it was a complete film and the weight would have been a lot lighter. I refused to give him a refund. He them went to ebay and the refunded his money but did NOT take it from my account. I talked with ebay and they said he would get away with it one because they monitor buyers who do that.If he tried it again he would be banned from ebay permanently.

Posted by Gerald Santana (Member # 2362) on October 26, 2013, 12:36 PM:

Thanks for these comments, I will seriously take them to heart. For a super fast update, I got this message from him after asking again for the film back fand he would indeed receive a full refund -- which he sent as a "gift" by the way:

"No, I'm keeping the footage; I do not trust you

end of all communications with you"

The collector is Dave Aquino and it was either his way or the highway...

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on 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.

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on October 26, 2013, 04:54 PM:

What Brad is suggesting to do would of course prevent you from any not honest buyer. But at what price ? Can you imagine yourself filming a screen projection and then the moment you pack the film ? Just because it may happen that on out of dozen of buyers coul try to coin you. It looks a little bit too much for me.

Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on October 26, 2013, 05:13 PM:

I bought a film of well known film dealer from overseas . it was described as ex print but when I received it had heavy scratches on right hand side for long periods of time and then they moved to the right then back to the left ,I should send it back but postage costs are expensive so I will keep it and suffer with it . if I had bought this from the uk I would have took film back and got my money back that's it for me no more from overseas

Posted by Dino Everette (Member # 1378) on October 27, 2013, 12:04 AM:

Gerald, very sorry to hear that..I think there is no real way to avoid bad experiences when dealing in an area of buying and selling...I hope this one works out, or at least you are not out too much money...

Posted by Gerald Santana (Member # 2362) on 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]

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!

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on October 27, 2013, 03:56 AM:

Gerald, from what you explained, I would say this buyer is not honnest. If he was someone who doesn't know anything about films he would have accepted your offer. His insistance of keeping the film as it is shows that he knows it is a rare copy or he is happy with its condition. The only think he is trying to do is to take money from you. You do what you want with your money but I don't think you should accept this situation as he may do the same with other people in the future if he sees that it works. You offered him a complete refund, he refused, end of the story.

Posted by Gerald Santana (Member # 2362) on 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 ]

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on October 27, 2013, 05:33 PM:

this is a problem, you may recall i recently sold a single part to master and commander to a guy in Germany, he bid a good price for part two only which was a perfect print, he then claimed it was faulty and told me if i didnt give him 50% back he would go via ebay who would force a 100% refund, it was only because i immediatly went to the resolution centre and copied and pasted his e mail to me that saved it, then that very same piece of trash collector only listed it again on ebay for a high price, when i came onto this forum,who he said he was a member of, and highlighted it he stopped the sale.

Posted by David M. Ballew (Member # 1818) on 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.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on October 28, 2013, 09:56 AM:

Gerard, I found your tread in the other forum, I got a feeling that you were being bullied.

Posted by Gerald Santana (Member # 2362) on 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.

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on October 28, 2013, 05:43 PM:

quote:
I checked the film on the bench with a complete cleaning.

Hi Gerald,

I'm a little confused at this point. I thought you said you hadn't checked the film prior to shipping??

Posted by Gerald Santana (Member # 2362) on October 28, 2013, 07:51 PM:

Hi Mike,

I cleaned the entire film, checked the first reel then, put it back into it's shipping can.

Please, I respectfully ask for no more questions about this matter. If you would like to share your own experiences with us here, go ahead and do so.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on October 28, 2013, 07:55 PM:

Mike,

Gerard said in his first post:

quote:
That was my first mistake by not checking it completely

I have sold many films and to be honest, I never check the film completely. Only the beginning. Lucky me I never got any problem.

Posted by Robert Crewdson (Member # 3790) on October 29, 2013, 05:30 PM:

Gerard, IMDB is a very useful site for checking running times; they also mention if the film was reissued in an edited version, for example, they may list a film as originally running at 90 mins, then state that it was reissued with a running time of 78 mins.

Posted by David Aquino (Member # 4006) on 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

Posted by Douglas Meltzer (Member # 28) on November 02, 2013, 04:47 PM:

Since both of the parties involved in this transaction have told their story, I'm going to close this thread. No need for further back and forth.....

Doug

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2