genomicstime STAY FAR AWAY FROM ORIN MCCORMICK

[Jim Smyth]

I am not buying the whole story either. He was self admitted New to buying watches. Bought a used lower end Rolex that is still fairly new dated in 2018. I mean how bad could it really be? You had to see the pictures of the watch prior to the sale. Did it not look like the pictures? Now after 6 months decides to do a Paypal dispute without even giving the Seller the courtesy of a heads up first or to let him make things correct in some way even though its been a long time since the sale. Handled very poorly and a dick move IMO.

[Topspin14m]

Originally Posted by BillA

Are you saying that the bar is low for Jared since he has been on the forum for a while? Sure the word “excellent” means different things to different people, but a poor polish job plus the watch failing the water proofing test is far from “excellent”. I agree the buyer of a watch needs to due some due diligence but a long time seller on TRF should not be taking advantage of a buyer. I am not saying he took advantage, but you must admit the stories are very different and at best confusing.

No. I’m saying that many dealers say every watch is excellent or 9/10 or whatever. Those aren’t terms that have a uniform definition. Dealers will commonly say “excellent” and the watch has been polished. If you are buying a watch on the internet, it’s on you to do diligence. Look at photos, ask questions, etc. He didn’t do anything for months - literally half a year! - how do we know it wasn’t water proofed and/or running to spec when delivered? Also - A lot of watch makers want to sell services and will say things like the watch isn’t waterproofed. How do we know it’s the watch maker that is reputable?

To me, this guy didn’t do the right diligence before or after he bought the watch. Half a year later he discovered some, what sound like minor, issues, and now wants all his money back. In the meantime he’s worn the watch for 6 months and now it’s had multiple owners/is older/worth less money. Ponycar should not be threatening anyone. That’s insane. But I can understand why he would be angry this guy took out a paypal dispute without contacting him - especially given this story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[psv]

There are so many issues here:

- The buyer seems to be wanting a brand new watch with a factory warranty and guarantees that will give you peace of mind - if that is the case, buy new from AD with the warranty card in your name, the receipt for the insurance, etc.

- Unless you ask in writing and the seller responds in writing that the watch is "unpolished", always assume that a watch has been polished or touched up for before a sale.

- "Excellent" condition can mean anything to anyone. You have to ask precise questions before buying. If there any doubts, simply don't buy the watch!

- The way I view it, a buyer in a transaction has 24-72 hrs to inspect the watch and conclude the transaction. After that, the rest is on you. While everything that you say about how you treat the watch might be true, you cannot honestly expect a seller to be able to accept returns 180 days after the sale?! Agree on the length of the inspection period and if you have a full refund policy BEFORE you pay.

- Regardless of how this went down, and I can understand Jared's frustration here, I don't think it is OK or good practice to hang out this guy with full name & details online (here or on FB). This guy made a lot of bad and questionable decisions, but should this episode really show up in Google searches from now on? Imagine him trying to land a new job and this shows up during the vetting process? I actually think this thread should probably be deleted, or at least full name removed.

Net/net to OP: You might have ended up buying something that didn't live up to your expectations, but you missed the boat on doing something about it. Unless Jared sold you a fake Rolex, you have no recourse here.

My advice: either get over the fact how this went down, do a full service at Rolex (perhaps it will be covered under warranty - call them and ask) and enjoy the watch. If this watch leaves a bad taste in your mouth, sell it, take the financial hit and move on. Chalk it down as a life-lesson.

[Knappo 1307]

These 2 need to show some facts, real quick.....

[afnios1]

6 months after??? 6 months later?? OmG

[EEpro]

Sounds like he worked himself into a panic toward the end. Probably everyone who buys their first watch used makes a bad call on the presence and quality of refinishing. The adult thing to do is send it to RSC.

[Vamp]

Where’s Jared’s response???

[Knappo 1307]

Originally Posted by Vamp

Where’s Jared’s response???

I have to agree here, if there was some sort of FB mention about going to someones house, that is very disturbing. If this was not mentioned at all, that is disturbing to bring something like that up. It's even more disconcerting that Jared, hasn't come on here to defend himself, and the buyer has not come on here with proof of the things he is accusing Jared of. Both have been to this thread since the buyer has made these accusations, and not one of them has come back to defend themselves. That in itself says a lot to me, silence is a sign of guilt.....

[Knappo 1307]

Genomicstime is looking at this thread as I type, 10:29 am...

[genomicstime]

Hello everyone,

I appreciate some of your comments, and I acknowledge all of them. I wanted to provide one set of follow-ups and, from this point, would prefer to get on with my life. I posted my first response because Jared was alleging fraud, and I take great issue with that, but I have neither the desire nor the bandwidth to litigate this further in the court of TRF.

I don’t mind that my TRF username is listed here - I respect Jared’s frustration and am happy to provide the full context to future potential sellers - but the listing of my personal information is beyond reasonable. This should be taken down and I’m willing to work with the mods to achieve this. Note that I have not disclosed his full information here which includes three aliases, phone number, address and business name etc.

Candidly, some of your criticisms and questions suggest that you did not read my response carefully, but I understand that it was a lot of information and will try to provide some additional info.

1. This idea that I didn’t ask questions/for additional photos is absurd, including whether the watch was polished. As I said, Jared’s answers were evasive and the polishing issue is subtle/was not easily discerned in his photos. He had ample opportunity to transparently disclose these items as well as the waterproofing. I understand there can be reasons for avoiding total transparency and I believe these are things he tried to sneak past me as a novice buyer.

2. As I have already stated: while the polishing issue upset me, this wasn’t the causal item in taking action – it was the uncertainty caused by the failure of the pressure test and rapidly deteriorating timing. Several of you are focusing on the wrong thing and I kindly refer you to my original response. Furthermore, the idea that these causal issues involving the case/movement are minor is purely speculative.

3. I have always operated on the assumption the warranty is void from my own research and Jared’s behavior and I don’t recall saying, anytime in any form, that I was expecting a brand-new watch. Jared stated in this thread that the watch is in warranty – it’s not reasonable for him to suddenly assert this against me when he so clearly did not want to confirm that during the sale, and I have all of this in writing.

4. The suggestion of buyer’s remorse is incorrect and, if I wanted my money back through fraud, the simplest and surest thing would have been to just say the watch was fake which I did not do (yes, this was a concern). I did not falsify information or make any of this up. I stated to Paypal, and Jared, that what I really wanted was for the watch to be serviced.

5. The idea that I am going to post information from businesses that would disclose my exact location, given the threats I previously described, is unrealistic and this has already gone well beyond the intended scope. I do have a write-up and results from the assessment, I provided that information to Paypal in support of my claim and, respectfully, I decline providing it in support of anyone’s desire to be an amateur detective. If the mods need this to remove my personal information, I'm happy to provide it privately. Otherwise TRF has no ability to influence my outcome and, as I said, I intend to move on having provided my side of this story.

6. Jared’s facebook is public and you can find it easily. I am not going to join the practice of posting his personal information here and transparently cite fear of retaliation had I chosen to do so.

[Knappo 1307]

Originally Posted by genomicstime

Hello everyone,

I appreciate some of your comments, and I acknowledge all of them. I wanted to provide one set of follow-ups and, from this point, would prefer to get on with my life. I posted my first response because Jared was alleging fraud, and I take great issue with that, but I have neither the desire nor the bandwidth to litigate this further in the court of TRF.

I don’t mind that my TRF username is listed here - I respect Jared’s frustration and am happy to provide the full context to future potential sellers - but the listing of my personal information is beyond reasonable. This should be taken down and I’m willing to work with the mods to achieve this. Note that I have not disclosed his full information here which includes three aliases, phone number, address and business name etc.

Candidly, some of your criticisms and questions suggest that you did not read my response carefully, but I understand that it was a lot of information and will try to provide some additional info.

1. This idea that I didn’t ask questions/for additional photos is absurd, including whether the watch was polished. As I said, Jared’s answers were evasive and the polishing issue is subtle/was not easily discerned in his photos. He had ample opportunity to transparently disclose these items as well as the waterproofing. I understand there can be reasons for avoiding total transparency and I believe these are things he tried to sneak past me as a novice buyer.

2. As I have already stated: while the polishing issue upset me, this wasn’t the causal item in taking action – it was the uncertainty caused by the failure of the pressure test and rapidly deteriorating timing. Several of you are focusing on the wrong thing and I kindly refer you to my original response. Furthermore, the idea that these causal issues involving the case/movement are minor is purely speculative.

3. I have always operated on the assumption the warranty is void from my own research and Jared’s behavior and I don’t recall saying, anytime in any form, that I was expecting a brand-new watch. Jared stated in this thread that the watch is in warranty – it’s not reasonable for him to suddenly assert this when he so clearly did not want to confirm that during the sale, and I have all of this in writing.

4. The suggestion of buyer’s remorse is incorrect and, if I wanted my money back, the simplest and surest thing would have been to just say the watch was fake which I did not do (yes, this was a concern). I stated to Paypal, and Jared, that what I really wanted was for the watch to be serviced.

5. The idea that I am going to post information from businesses that would disclose my exact location, given the threats I previously described, is unrealistic and this has already gone well beyond the intended scope. I do have a write-up and results from the assessment, I provided that information to Paypal in support of my claim and, respectfully, I decline providing it in support of anyone’s desire to play amateur detective. If the mods need this to remove my personal information, I'm happy to provide it privately. Otherwise TRF has no ability to influence my outcome and, as I said, I intend to move on having provided my side of this story.

6. Jared’s facebook is public and you can find it easily. I am not going to join the practice of posting his personal information here and transparently cite fear of retaliation had I chosen to do so.

All these issues before the sale, and you still chose to purchase the watch? As soon as you received it, you would have been able to see the "bad" polish job, it should have ended right there. Either you send the watch back, or get a service and get a partial refund for a polish.
The junior detectives on TRF are only commenting because you have not provided one stitch of evidence to prove your point, and obviously Paypal didn't think you did either because you lost your case. As I said before, in the future purchase from a AD. Now please go wither off....

[MoosicPa]

Originally Posted by genomicstime

Hello everyone,

I appreciate some of your comments, and I acknowledge all of them. I wanted to provide one set of follow-ups and, from this point, would prefer to get on with my life. I posted my first response because Jared was alleging fraud, and I take great issue with that, but I have neither the desire nor the bandwidth to litigate this further in the court of TRF.

Then why are did you bring this here in the first place?

Originally Posted by Knappo 1307

All these issues before the sale, and you still chose to purchase the watch? As soon as you received it, you would have been able to see the "bad" polish job, it should have ended right there. Either you send the watch back, or get a service and get a partial refund for a polish.
The junior detectives on TRF are only commenting because you have not provided one stitch of evidence to prove your point, and obviously Paypal didn't think you did either because you lost your case. As I said before, in the future purchase from a AD. Now please go wither off....

I agree.... Jared was right on this one.

[Chewbacca]

Originally Posted by genomicstime

Hello everyone,

I appreciate some of your comments, and I acknowledge all of them. I wanted to provide one set of follow-ups and, from this point, would prefer to get on with my life. I posted my first response because Jared was alleging fraud, and I take great issue with that, but I have neither the desire nor the bandwidth to litigate this further in the court of TRF.

I don’t mind that my TRF username is listed here - I respect Jared’s frustration and am happy to provide the full context to future potential sellers - but the listing of my personal information is beyond reasonable. This should be taken down and I’m willing to work with the mods to achieve this. Note that I have not disclosed his full information here which includes three aliases, phone number, address and business name etc.

Candidly, some of your criticisms and questions suggest that you did not read my response carefully, but I understand that it was a lot of information and will try to provide some additional info.

1. This idea that I didn’t ask questions/for additional photos is absurd, including whether the watch was polished. As I said, Jared’s answers were evasive and the polishing issue is subtle/was not easily discerned in his photos. He had ample opportunity to transparently disclose these items as well as the waterproofing. I understand there can be reasons for avoiding total transparency and I believe these are things he tried to sneak past me as a novice buyer.

2. As I have already stated: while the polishing issue upset me, this wasn’t the causal item in taking action – it was the uncertainty caused by the failure of the pressure test and rapidly deteriorating timing. Several of you are focusing on the wrong thing and I kindly refer you to my original response. Furthermore, the idea that these causal issues involving the case/movement are minor is purely speculative.

3. I have always operated on the assumption the warranty is void from my own research and Jared’s behavior and I don’t recall saying, anytime in any form, that I was expecting a brand-new watch. Jared stated in this thread that the watch is in warranty – it’s not reasonable for him to suddenly assert this against me when he so clearly did not want to confirm that during the sale, and I have all of this in writing.

4. The suggestion of buyer’s remorse is incorrect and, if I wanted my money back, the simplest and surest thing would have been to just say the watch was fake which I did not do (yes, this was a concern). I stated to Paypal, and Jared, that what I really wanted was for the watch to be serviced.

5. The idea that I am going to post information from businesses that would disclose my exact location, given the threats I previously described, is unrealistic and this has already gone well beyond the intended scope. I do have a write-up and results from the assessment, I provided that information to Paypal in support of my claim and, respectfully, I decline providing it in support of anyone’s desire to play amateur detective. If the mods need this to remove my personal information, I'm happy to provide it privately. Otherwise TRF has no ability to influence my outcome and, as I said, I intend to move on having provided my side of this story.

6. Jared’s facebook is public and you can find it easily. I am not going to join the practice of posting his personal information here and transparently cite fear of retaliation had I chosen to do so.

Ok! So as a result of #4, you’re certainly an a-hole for even suggesting this.

And, obviously a wait 6mo Seller’s nightmare customer.

[77T]

There’s a problem with new buyers not acquainting themselves of the ins/outs of buying in an open, free market. And then acquitting themselves as if TRF is a nannystate where whining is rewarded.

There’s a problem with experienced sellers posting listings with the barest details and one or two ill-made photo(s). And then expecting poorly informed buyers to evaluate properly.

And when these two problems come together, we get fissionable mass.

Just my 2¢...

Both parties should hopefully learn from this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Fleetlord]

Originally Posted by 77T

There’s a problem with new buyers not acquainting themselves of the ins/outs of buying in an open, free market. And then acquitting themselves as if TRF is a nannystate where whining is rewarded.

There’s a problem with experienced sellers posting listings with the barest details and one or two ill-made photo(s). And then expecting poorly informed buyers to evaluate properly.

And when these two problems come together, we get fissionable mass.

Just my 2¢...

Both parties should hopefully learn from this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

100% Agreed. This is exactly what happened. Inexperienced buyer with NIB expectations meets seller with lackluster for sale posts. Bound to end in drama sooner or later.

The buyer should stick to AD for purchasing watches. Buy new.

Seller needs to put more effort into the sales posts in order to avoid this again.

Case Closed.

[EEpro]

Well put.

[nyyankees]

For what it's worth I have dealt with Jared many times face to face. If anything my experience has been that his watches are better than described. For the buyer to try to go back to him 6 months after seems unreasonable because he could have done anything to that watch to throw off the time keeping or even to compromise the waterproofing (I don't know what - but it was in his possession for 6 months!). Had the buyer gotten it check out within the first few days or weeks I think it would have been a completely different story.

[soweis101]

I just bought a 114060 from Jared last week. It was one of the easiest transactions I have made. The item was exactly what was advertised. Seems to me this guy just had buyers remorse or need the cash to fund something else that came up. No one in the right mind would buy a watch on the forum and not notice something wrong until six months later.

[cda555]

Feel like I'm taking crazy pills tonight.

If you are driving on the freeway and you miss the exit, there are generally two responses: 1) Swerve across all lanes, over solid lines, endangering everyone. 2) Think "oh crap," keep driving until the next exit, own your mistake, and accept that you will be a little bit late. The first response is chalked full of entitlement. The second is the correct option.

The buyer had all kinds of red flags before agreeing to send thousands of dollars to a stranger. Then he STILL sent the money. Buyer received the watch, gave it a once over, and tossed it out of sight. Buyer goes on the forum and gives a glowing review about the seller and the watch. Six months later, the buyer decided to channel his inner inspector gadget then claim the watch has all sorts of issues. Then, the buyer runs to Paypal instead of putting on his big boy pants and going directly to the seller. Insane.

You do not get to cry novice on an error this large. If you drop that kind of money you should at the very least inspect the crap out of the watch the instant it is in your hands... novice or not. Instead, you should eat your potential loss of $500 (IF the watch's warranty is "voided"... and that's a big IF). You still have a genuine Rolex. It's not like the seller sent you a polished turd. Move on with your life and stop buying used watches.

[ponycar350]

I DO NOT KNOW THE MENTAL STABILITY OF ORIN McCormick HOWEVER I SUSPECT DISPUTING ANY TYPE OF PURCHASE 6 MONTHS AFTER PURCHASE WHEN NO PROOF OF ANYTHING HAS BEEN SENT IN WRITING TO THE SELLER OR CONTACTING THE SELLER FIRST SUGGESTS SOME TYPE OF BRAIN DAMAGE. OH YEAH THE KICKER....THE WATCH IS UNDER FACTORY WARRANTY. GOOD LUCK WITH ALL THIS NONSENSE and stop wasting everyone's time. I am available anytime to talk 609-560-1392.