awww c'mon now...dispute tag!!!

-- what for with all those type of answer ,, and explaination ..

-- 1. are you going to refund the buyer ...?
-- 2. are you taking the respondsiblity to go DiGi centre settle the activation problem ..?

-- no need any more explaination ..

-- just give the answer .. YES ..or NO ..

This post has been edited by bdl: Aug 10 2007, 11:27 AM

I think the admin or moderators should just jolly well close this thread and slap a dispute tag on the seller.

I don't see how is she trying to solve this matter amicably with her imbecilic replies.

How many times we have to explain to you?Let's put this way,you or your bro didn't cheat.You both are nice dudes.

Your brother sold the card (He didn't give it for free)
Buyer received the sim card but the card not active,fine but the sim already been PURGED (cannot be activated)
So why the hell the buyer paid you the RM100+ for?Just to receive the purged sim card?
What prove you want?it's already clear that the sim card sold by you/your brother cannot be activated or cannot be used.What for you asking us to prove you/your brother intended to cheat?NO,you guys did't cheat but the item you sold are NOT USABLE!Why can't you get it?

And pls don't use "other seller put this,said this".You have no rights to compare your case with anyone else.They've never come out with such dispute where the seller CAN'T understand anything.I've never seen any dispute like this.It is just YOU CAN'T UNDERSTAND!All you want is to prove to us that you or your brother not guilty.Fine,you guys not guilty but The item(s) you sold is not usable,the buyer bought from you,not digi.

Buy from you - your buyers (Your responsible)
Buy from Digi - Digi's buyers (Digi's responsible)
Buy from me - My buyers (My responsible)
Buy from badawi - badawi's buyers (Badawi responsible)


You are the one SHOULD be responsible to your buyers,not Digi.If you feel you or your bro cheated by Digi,tefund to your buyers and go and ask Digi because you bought it from Digi.

I don't know how to make you understand.

OR you/your brother already used the money and don't have a single cent to refund the buyers?

This post has been edited by kingmaker_20: Aug 10 2007, 04:23 PM

OMG

to rene, please settle this asap.
in ur thread ur selling number (DIGI Number) and not sim card (DIGI Sim Card)
since the DIGI Number cannot be working as a normal so that mean the transaction is not complete (only one person got the benefit from the transaction), so here please be fair and be responsible person coz the things that u sell is DIGI Number and the things that the buyer got is ONLY DIGI Sim Card

thx.

rene,

what if i sell you a digi number that you cannot activate? or i sell to you a handphone that cannot be switch on?
what would you do?

If i buy a can food from a hypermarket and found that it has already expired when i got back home, i would have exchanged it at the hypermarket that i bought from....dun tell me the hypermarket will refuse to do so and ask you to exchange it from the manufacturer/producer....this is part of the seller responsibility......

selling a product that can't be use = consider conning the buyer edi.

Cheers.

seven pages already?

Is definately a con case. That's all.

I second that! This case considered as CON case.

Look, I could've given the dispute tag last week and bully rene into issuing a refund. Is that really the right thing to do? What do you think it will achieve?

On the other hand, I can leave you guys to build a nice solid case against rene, without using the crutches of the dispute tag. Instead, people like yourself just have bloodthirsty cries for dispute tags to be handed out.

good example given,as seller ,ijuz wonder why she said that she totally dunno that the number is expired ?

actually ,dispute tag its so important ?i think now ,the thing u must do is temp closed that sim card selling thread to prevent the third ,fourth and fifth victim .

Can we have a staff come in here ? i cant really understand what wKkay is talking about. Build a solid case ? Explain ur "solid case" meaning. Is fair for u to defend on the seller but u must give us a good reason/explanation else i think u are siding seller with ur "unknown reason".

Is so clearly she is "selling item on behalf of others (her bro)" so she break 1 rules already then clearly she did not want to take responsibility. ARE U TELLING US THE BUYER IS AT FAULT HERE ? paying for a useless sim card ?

If not BUYER FAULT NOT SELLER FAULT are u trying to tell us is DIGI FAULT ?? clearly now is seller have RM100+ in his pocket and buyer have a useless sim card.

For us buyer here at LYN just wanted a dispute tag on her so everyone beware of her irresponsible selling. We are not asking u to blacklist her although with her trade ethic i think she deserve it too.


FAQ of Dispute Resolution Corner

So who determines who to be listed onto the black list / M.O. List?
Contrary to what people may think, it is NOT only the moderator who decides who to be listed onto the black list but every other fellow members here. We decide whether to list or not to list someone onto the list based on the discussion that has been carried out. There are no personal preferences in the decisions made here.

So wKkay can u get some other mod/staff to come and view at this thread ? You have fail to explain urself and i think is fair for the buyer to request another person to judge this thread.

This post has been edited by chitchat: Aug 11 2007, 09:00 PM

i didnt sell the "bread" pass the expiry date. The expiry date for the "bread" is 2008. Me and bro has been labeled con through out. Then prove it. And no mistake made when the number is sold.

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 9:37 pmAnd are you trying to be the profiler here? Whatever i say will look lame, robotic, arrogant etc unless i said what you all wanna read. Like i said, please keep me informed if the buyer do proceed with futher action. And when and what was the promise made before the sale is made? it is a classic textbook case that yo need to prove what you accuse/allege a person of doing/saying.

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 9:49 pmI agree lenght of time has nothing gotta do with it but where is the 'con' factor? o its fair to give out an automatic dispute tag if there is no solution found and seller don't wanna do refund even though its not a con case?

As for the refund policy - answer already.


This post has been edited by rene: Aug 11 2007, 09:49 PM

yes is expiry in 2008 if you dont activated it... its been activated.. registered.. left somewhere in the blackhole...
and why is the no.. has been purged.. ur mistake is fail to check the condition of the item ur sell la....

fission mailed..

This post has been edited by badang_1785: Aug 11 2007, 10:02 PM

yup i know the difference and i know someone will say this and guess what? concept of guilty or not applies to criminal law. civill law, its either you liable or not liable. and motive - in a death case - its motive to murder and motive to cause harm. in civil law - its not motive to get money but motive to con. so where is the evidence of con? i have offer a solution- prove the intention to con and i will refund.

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 9:59 pmAnswer already.

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 10:03 pmAnswer already to all the above comments. No all question can be answer with one word yes or no.

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 10:13 pmAnd how "smart" of you to call other people name. I do wonder how rude can rude be...

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 10:19 pmAnswer to all already.
And you have the right to judge me or bro?
How can bro b responsible if digi terminates the number before the expiry date and before activation?
understanding? why should i agree with your view if i don't?
And I said already, if proven con case, then I will refund. So issue whether money spent or not, I will refund it.

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 10:22 pmsolution offered already...
er... terms doesnt hv anything to do with it.

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 10:25 pmtwo totally different product. i check hp before i buy.
expired food- someone gave the example already and answer to it already.
con - answer already too. knowledge? intention?

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 10:28 pmits a con just because its 7 pages already and just because you and the rest of the people say so?

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 10:29 pmIts a con just because you said so?

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 10:31 pmIf pack say 2008 and you can't activate the number to check the validity and didn't call the digi to check on the validity, how would you know the number has been terminated? You are already, like there rest of them out there in this thread, suggesting that bro and me are cons... and have you check the digi selling thread?

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 10:41 pmWhere is the intention to con? Prove it. So easy for you to just throw accusation isn't it? I'm I the only one posting a thread for someone else in the buy & sell section? And has this gotta do with everything? I;m a cheat just because the rule is broken? I'm at fault just because the rule is broken? And did the buyers ever raise this as an issue when they buy from my bro?

---

Added on August 11, 2007, 10:43 pmcan you activate a card without putting the sim card into the phone and if you can then who can do it? and why didnt check etc, has been explain already and my bro is not at fault for not checking.

This post has been edited by rene: Aug 11 2007, 10:47 PM

rene - Ur product for sell was a functional sim with a desired number, correct?

And not bro fault that the sim & number is not "functioning". I said this already.

Sounds like the Seller is a Lawyer wannabe....

rene - fault lies in responsibility. The item for sale was a sim card that allow the owner to receives calls on a specific number. Your conditions did not stipitate that the card maybe not totally unuseable, correct? Otherwise, you might as well stated 'no warranty for DOA'. Because, what you sold was DOA.

Loyar buruk

if all crime must have motive to prove guilty then no 1 will be jailed. If accident considered as "not intended to" (meaning not guilty in Rene's opinion) then no body have to pay when the accident happen. (so no insurance company needed in this world)
In common law, even if it is not the buyer/defendant intention to give bad item, it is the buyer responsibility to check the item in good condition b4 the transaction happens.