Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed New Topic New Poll

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> (disputed solved) ASUS PDA

Share on | Track this topic | Print this topic
kevin613
post Jul 28 2007, 02:47 PM

Newbie
*******
Senior Member
2,236 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: BB Bangi
QUOTE(silverblue @ Jul 28 2007, 01:54 PM)
just be careful when buying viking's item cause usually he'll sell item which he trade in with others.
for example, if he got a phone to sell and usually he'll say trade in with ANYTHING. so when u want to trade, say for example..another phone/gadgets..he'll buy with with a very low price and then list it again at lowyat after mark-up.
*
what is wrong with that? he is a trader, and that is how the business goes..


anyway, i think buyer should bear a wee bit of responsibiliy for paying before 100% sure of the condition. if u paid, means u agreed with the buy and sell term, and the seller has the right to not refund as long as it works as promised, and the warranty is valid.. it is the buyer's responsibility to ensure that the item's external condition is up to his own standard before paying cause external condition is arguable and almost impossible to quantify.. he could argue that the scratches are only 5% while u could take it as 20%.. safest is still to COD, or dun buy if there's any doubt..
kevin613
post Jul 30 2007, 04:12 PM

Newbie
*******
Senior Member
2,236 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: BB Bangi
QUOTE(Malaysian @ Jul 30 2007, 03:04 PM)
It's not about who make the top hole or scratches anymore.

The real problem now is The buyer proposed a solution which is refund and buyer bare the courier fees. And the seller ask us to be in his shoe and make a point that he is not the one that cause the top hole scracthes.

So the judgement will be back to the quality as claimed as The seller and his high quality pictures in this thread http://forum.lowyat.net/index.php?showtopic=492350&hl=

but ignoring the rating 95% claimed by the seller nice condition quality of the pda.Because no one can rate by % for the quality of a product. So we judge from the seller and the buyer pictures posted inside here.

We know the answer.It's very obvious about the quality right from the start.

We disregard the top hole/scratches because both the seller and the buyer denying who caused it.

So we judge the other part of the pda's quality.

This is the buyer's picture after he get the pda but ignore the top part hole quality.

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/5442/28072007041kz6.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/4884/28072007039zq4.jpg

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/1908/28072007031ee5.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/8131/28072007022os8.jpg

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/1686/28072007025uw7.jpg

below is the true real picture from both side the seller and the buyer
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «

» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


From the picture,the conclusion is The seller's picture is perfect 95% condition but not perfect after using gamma to brighten the pictures. The seller picture is in here

http://forum.lowyat.net/index.php?showtopic=492350&hl=
So the seller picture is match with the buyer picture which also means the quality of the pda is the same right from the start from the seller hand till the buyer hand but ignoring the top hole part (because both of them denying who caused it)

So we need a solution on it.Right now the buyer proposed the solution which is refund and he will be paying for the courier fees and the seller rejected claiming he is not held responsible for the overall scratches or the top part hole.
*
referring to this pic from buyer
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «

i don't see any problem with the bottom part that u highlighted.. that could just simply be an underexposed part..
dun over-react with your "findings".. wink.gif it doesn't proof anything..
it seems more like photo quality rather than the actual phone condition..

edited as per viking's request.. sorry for any inconvenience caused..

This post has been edited by kevin613: Jul 30 2007, 04:52 PM
kevin613
post Aug 1 2007, 08:20 AM

Newbie
*******
Senior Member
2,236 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: BB Bangi
QUOTE(RoxyGal @ Aug 1 2007, 01:47 AM)

This is malaysian nick posting

There is no dispute about the pda anymore.So remember to judge correctly and pick up 10 random senior members.

And the 10 random seniors members cannot be involved in any trading (seller in lyn) to make the right judgement

Remember to look at my photoshop pictures and compare to seller PDA thread's pictures.


user posted image
*
duh... your photoshop pic doesn't proof anything, that is just a mere photo defect aka under exposed..
dun try to create fake evidence here from your own unproven forensics..
kevin613
post Aug 1 2007, 09:05 AM

Newbie
*******
Senior Member
2,236 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: BB Bangi
QUOTE(ad_rv4 @ Aug 1 2007, 08:41 AM)
better solution :

1. seller replace the whole casing since the scracth/crack invovled front+back+centre casing, i don't know why ur refering to the top casing????

2. i will call ASUS CENTRE and ask them the cost of the whole casing and inform seller.

3. seller bank in the money to my acc.

4. i will go on my own to ASUS CENTRE to replace the casing, so next time i know the place, i ask the people there anything about the PDA, that's the better way i learn of my ASUS P525, im still learning using PDA..

so HOW?????
*
there is no proof that shows that who created the crack there, so i think asking for a full casing replacement is a bit unfair to the seller, dealing stuffs thru postage does suffer from risks of dead/damage on arrival, and i think that risk should be borne by buyer cause it is the method that he chose to transact. i'm not jumping to conclusions that the damage was done by postage though, don't get me wrong.. so i believe seller does need to bear a bit of responsibility in this case, and so do u as the buyer.
however, if the seller decides to give u a full casing replacement, then consider yourself lucky, cause that is not 100% his responsibility.. for transparency purposes, u might wanna ask for a quote from Asus using email, and post the quote here..just a suggestion though.. u decide..
peace
kevin613
post Aug 1 2007, 09:17 AM

Newbie
*******
Senior Member
2,236 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: BB Bangi
QUOTE(wandzul @ Aug 1 2007, 09:10 AM)
we dont know why but its still his mistake, doesnt it? and still yet he cant explain why the defects arent visible in his sale thread thus resulting to misleading.. (can only see when u adjust the gamma)
so i think TS deserves an apology.. but viking also deserves one from TS due to some quite rude postings.. isnt it?
*
huh?? adjust gamma? so u're taking malaysian's forensics for real?
common lah, that is just a photo defect.. what responsibility do seller have to bear for some under exposure in the photo???
refer to post #232, compare the part that malaysian circled, and the photo that buyer posted, is there any hole/scratches that resembles the black spot there??

This post has been edited by kevin613: Aug 1 2007, 09:21 AM
kevin613
post Aug 1 2007, 09:41 AM

Newbie
*******
Senior Member
2,236 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: BB Bangi
QUOTE(wandzul @ Aug 1 2007, 09:25 AM)
so seller can use underexposured pics as an excuse?? u dont forget that TS oredi asked about where's the scratches.. and seller asked to see the pics advertised.. where can see one? it looked like there's no scratch liao..

well, would u accept it as photo effect if u're the buyer? in sale thread u dont even see one (unless the chrome button).. when it comes to ur hand, voila, nice crack!

do it ur self and u'll see whats there.. dont be too lazy dude.. need to highlight again?
*
i'm not here to argue with u k..
that isn't even an effect that is created on purpose, don't just argue for the sake of winning the arguement.. use your common sense, and u will know that underexposure is very common in photography, and that part that malaysian highlighted and circled, doesn't have any defects at all.. don't nit-pick something out of nothing and try to win an arguement. i have no intention of arguing, just pointing the fact to u that the underexposure wasn't created on purpose, and the point that malaysian pointed out using his uber leet photoshop skills is not valid at all..
don't get too personal..

This post has been edited by kevin613: Aug 1 2007, 09:43 AM
kevin613
post Aug 1 2007, 09:49 AM

Newbie
*******
Senior Member
2,236 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: BB Bangi
QUOTE(wandzul @ Aug 1 2007, 09:44 AM)
not really.. did u see pics from TS also? are they photo effect too? same place? same shape? LOL.. do investigate dude..
*
i am just pointing out what u wrote earlier,about the gamma tweaking with photoshop done by malaysian which u think is valid.
show me which pic from TS that u're referring to, and i shall comment furthur..
refer to my post #232, i've compared the edited photos from malaysian(taken from seller), and photos from buyer, same spot, nothing appeared there that resembles the black spot that appears after gamma tweaking..
so how much investigation that u've done that u concluded that malaysian's point is valid?

This post has been edited by kevin613: Aug 1 2007, 09:56 AM
kevin613
post Aug 1 2007, 02:12 PM

Newbie
*******
Senior Member
2,236 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: BB Bangi
QUOTE(ad_rv4 @ Aug 1 2007, 01:20 PM)
i will stick to my solution, dun offer me ur generousity, be more responsible of what u hv done nod.gif .. im not gaining anything, i give u chance to correct ur mistake, RIGHT??? maybe i should highlight the other parts which got scratch oso since you keep saying im only claiming of the top part???  hmm.gif ...let me thinks about it..
*
bear in mind that u're buying a used item, and a used items means it probably has a few scratches here and there.. and i don't think viking is liable to bear any sort of responsibility for any of the scratches except the crack on top which u too share the responsibility.. be reasonable, u're still pointing fingers on viking in your current post, and posing high as in giving viking chance.. why not put it the other way round then? that viking is offering u a chance to fix the crack? i think both sides bear same responsibilities, so the best is still to avoid those sentences that would pose 1 party higher than another..

This post has been edited by kevin613: Aug 1 2007, 02:13 PM
kevin613
post Aug 2 2007, 09:35 AM

Newbie
*******
Senior Member
2,236 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: BB Bangi
QUOTE(suiteng @ Aug 2 2007, 09:24 AM)
It's good that you're happier now.

Great to know that case is solved.
*
case solved??
viking agreed to give him front and back cover replacement already?
he is just asking, i haven't see viking agreeing yet.. viking proposed 50-50 for the cost of replacing the front+back no? viking's last proposal only mentioned bearing 100% of the housing if it only involves replacing just the top. in the case of replacing the front+back is almost replacing the entire housing that is covering the surface of the phone already.
i can only see he's not willing to bear a wee bit of responsibility at all, and still trying to push everything onto viking even with his last post.. hinting that viking is at wrong, and he's giving chance.. anyway we sure learn a lot from this thread, and we knew who is responsible and who is not, and we shall know who to avoid in future.. viking should make his T&C clearer next time, especially about the fussy buyer part.. lol..

This post has been edited by kevin613: Aug 2 2007, 10:24 AM
« Next Oldest · Dispute Resolution Corner · Next Newest »
 

Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
 0.0375sec    3.93    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 23rd December 2025 - 09:42 PM
All Rights Reserved 2002- 2020 Vijandren Ramadass (~ unite against racism ~)
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025  IPS, Inc.