Hello all,
There are so many opinions flying around about this situation. As a
business owner myself, if I were put in that sitution, I do feel my first
obligation is to refund in full the money that was paid for the item. As the
business owner, it is my responsibility to then deal with my loss because I am
the initial person who had the transaction that caused the loss. While I'm sure
I probably would have made the same mistake since at the point of original
purchase from Haggard there was no reason to doubt the card was not an
original, once I resold it and it was determined to be a "fake", I feel it
would have been my responsibilty, not only ethically but morally, to refund
the money.
That is precisely why I have business insurance. It is then my insurance
company's responsiblity, if I put in a claim, to recoup the loss even though I
am a very active participant in helping to recoup that money also. That is
exactly what happened in my Joe Hernandez theft case. In my case, UPS was
involved as the box was shipped to me practically empty and void of the 15+
posters that were supposedly being returned. Most business insurance policies
are set up this way, especially if you have a large, expensive inventory. I do
know that sometimes business owners are hesitant to put in a claim worrying
about their premiums going up or the possibility of being cancelled, and, in
this economy, more overhead costs are tough.
I don't know the entire circumstances of this case, only what Jim has
told me. I hate to see him having to initiate another lawsuit (he's been
through so much already). I'm sure Debi is hurting from this situation also.
I can't speak to why the situation has escalated to this point.
Sue
www.hollywoodposterframes.com
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:25:14 -0500
From: slinkenb...@comcast.net
Subject: Re: [MOPO] Universal Horror Fraud Update
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
While I don't presume to know anyone's personal finances (and I would never
recommend anyone go into business being under-capitalized, but understand it is
a fact of life in many small businesses) , this is a point that I mentioned to
Jim when I first heard of the dispute with Debi and suggested that he offer her
the option of paying back over time and even with partial credit. My
understanding is that both of these scenarios were rejected.
Also a few other points:
1. The amount in question here is $11,000 as noted in the complaint, not
$40,000, 50,000 or some other number (and certainly not $80,000).
2. Your math is faulty in thinking she would have an $80,000 loss (using your
hypothetical scenario). If you pay $40,000 for something, sell it, and refund
the money your loss is still only your purchase price. If you were selling an
item on consignment, sold it, paid the consignor, and now can't find him/her,
that would be a better argument for greater loss. Alas, that is not the case
here.
3. Debi is the dealer in this situation and while I agree she is also a victim,
yes I believe that she is responsible for both refunding a customer who
purchased a fake from her and she is responsible for pursuing the person who
sold it to her. That is one of the main reasons why people chose to buy from a
supposedly reputable dealer to start with: reliability, honesty, and integrity.
It appears some of these qualities are lacking both from this dealer and this
transaction.
----- Original Message -----
From: James Richard
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 1:37 PM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] Universal Horror Fraud Update
I don't know the situation with Debi -- and it's obvious she can't comment on
it publicly with a lawsuit in the offing -- but why doesn't anyone (Sean in
particular) consider the fact that she might have wanted to refund the money
but simply did not have it to refund? I mean -- to pose a hypothetical -- say
she paid Kerry or whomever $40,000 for the item and then resold it to Jim for,
say $50,000. She only made $10,000 on the deal, but Jim wants his $50,000 back.
She doesn't have it unless she can get her original $40,000 back from Kerry or
whomever she bought it from -- she's short $40,000 of what she "owes" to Jim.
Are people saying she should be out both the $40,000 she paid for the item PLUS
the $50,000 Jim wants back? Obviously she should return whatever profit she
made on the deal to Jim... but if neither one of them knew they were dealing
with a forgery, why Jim should take zero loss and Debi take the hit for both of
them to the tune of an $80,000 loss? How is that fair and equitable if Debi
didn't know she was being sold a fake in the first place? She's just as much of
a victim as Jim is, isn't she?
Nope, sorry, but if she were an innocent dupe and had no idea she was passing
on a forgery, then she has a perfect right to tell Jim, "I'm sorry this
happened, but I simply don't have $40,000 of your money to return to you right
now and I won't have it until I get the money back that I paid for the item in
the first place, so you'll have to get in line for that just like me and
everyone else."
It's all well and good if you are Heritage and have a ton of money sloshing
around in your bank account -- plus an hefty insurance policy to cover you
against contingencies likes this -- but if you're just a regular person/seller
like Debi, how are you supposed to come up with the money for a refund unless
you can get your own money back from the con men first?
Maybe some on this list have an extra $40,000 (or whatever the actual amount
is) laying around that they can just hand out "on principle", but I'm afraid
99% of the people don't have that option. I doubt many movie posters sellers
are in any financial position to take a $40,000 loss and then come up with the
ready cash to take an additional $40,000 loss on top of that to make a refund.
However, Debi should have at least offered to immediately refund to Jim any
profit she made on the transaction. Perhaps she did that, but Jim refused to
accept a partial refund. His lawyer would probably advise him not to. But we
don't know the details and won't know until and if the case goes to public
trial. I'll agree that in a perfect world where we all have tons of free cash
lying around that Debi should have refunded all of Jim's money immediately and
then worried about getting her own back from Kerry & Co., but most of us just
don't live in that world and wouldn't have that option if it were us standing
in Debi's shoes.
-- JR
Sean Linkenback wrote:
Jim,
you do realize that this is a civil suit and not a criminal one, yes? Innocent
until proven guilty isn't really a term used in this case, that's for criminal
trials (such as Haggard's upcoming trial when the FBI arrest him).
But I wasn't attacking Debi, just expressing my disbelief that her dealings
with Jim have had to come to a lawsuit.
In this particular case the facts are quite clear:
1. Jim paid Debi for a lobby card (that she apparently received in a trade
from Haggard)
2. This lobby card was later determined to be fake
3. Jim returned the lobby card to Debi and is awaiting a refund
There can only be a few reasons that Debi is refusing to refund in this
situation.
1. Jim DIDN'T pay Debi for this item, or Debi did not accept payment for it
(Jim's proof of payment says this is not true).
2. The lobby card ISN'T fake (report from Carol Tincup says this is not the
situation)
3. Jim DIDN'T return the card to Debi (proof of receipt says this isn't true).
4. Jim switched out a real card for a fake one? (a ridiculous idea that anyone
who knows Jim would attest to)
5. Jim somehow profited from the deal and Debi is refusing to refund (not sure
how you profit when you spend money buying a fake, but I'm listing it anyways)
For months Bruce has been warning of the dangers of dealing with people who
have sold fakes and would not accept responsibility for doing so, here we have
clear evidence of a supposedly reputable dealer selling a fake and not
refunding the customer who has purchased it.
Debi needs to do the right thing and refund Jim Gresham and pursue the forger
who sold/traded her the fake just as many others are doing.
And Jim, to answer your question - NO. Like Bruce, in my years of dealing I
have never had a lawsuit or a court case, either against me or initiated by me.
I guess having some sort of a moral compass and actually attempting to do the
right thing instead of just pay lip service to the concept has served me well
so far.
Sean
----- Original Message -----
From: jim episale
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] Universal Horror Fraud Update
Sean
It is really beyond belief that you continue until attack Debi. Have you NEVER
been involved in a lawsuit? The First thing that your attorney tells you is not
to discuss the case. It will be interesting to see what finally comes out. And
I hope that you will be as quick to apologize as you have been to criticize As
for me I still believe in the adage of our American Justice system “ Innocent
Until PROVEN Guilty”.
jim
Check out our shop video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-n2AznLA8o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCP7PaO-2tk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fojAZcbvL7E&feature=related
jim episale
Unshredded Nostalgia
323 South main St. Route 9
Barnegat, N.J. 08005
800-872-9990 609-660-2626
"Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional."
From: MoPo List [mailto:mop...@listserv.american.edu] On Behalf Of Sean
Linkenback
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 5:43 PM
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: [MOPO] Universal Horror Fraud Update
There have been two new cases filed against sellers of fake Universal Horror
posters:
GC 091284 James Gresham v. Debi Jacobson
CV 06529 Movietime, Inc. et al v. Haggard
It is no surprise to see another case against Haggard (this time by the owners
of the eBay ID JerseryProductions), and anyone else who has been defrauded by
Haggard needs to act soon to preserve their rights against his pending
bankruptcy filing.
But it is sad to see Debi Jacobson still refusing to take responsibility for
selling a Universal horror fake. For someone who wanted to "do the right
thing", I guess the right thing means defending against a lawsuit instead of
refunding a customer who returned a fake item to her several months ago.
Makes me quite glad that I deal with people like Bruce, Heritage, Todd F., and
others who stand 100% behind their material and offer unconditional money-back
guarantees
(as I also do), and not dealers who offer questionable tactics and hide behind
attorneys.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
