Leaving TRF; a different perspective

[presario]

Really sucks to hear. Jim is solely the one responsible and he should have the honor to take back the watch if he had mislead you to believe the watch was like new without the stickers. Jim needs to answer for this.

The OP did make a mistake asking Alfred though and I think he was just frustrated in thinking that he needs to do something when he is clearly not at fault.

That's why I think exchanges should only be done face to face so each party can inspect the watch prior to the deal. Or only deal with respected forum sellers in order to avoid such headaches. Either way sucks to hear and I hope things get resolved.

[occb2]

I agree with Presario on the face to face. It is very hard if your in different states but you went through a trusted seller here which I would say should have inspected the watch prior to the transfer and told you every detail.

Its like when I got my 996 turbo. It was in a different state. So I called up the local trusted Indy shop and had them do a full Pre purchase inspection or PPI. When I flew down to drive her home I knew what I was getting into. The same should happen here.

Just thinking out loud but did the trusted seller make any money in the trade? If not I guess he wouldn't really have to inspect the watch just take it in and mail it out. Good luck brother. Happy thanksgiving and I hope it all works out.

That might have been a better choice. Having a trusted dealer here do a pre purchase inspection of the watch and pay him for his time and effort and the seller do the same on his watch.

[ncstate1201]

Yeah shouldn't involve Alfred, if I were him I would assume you were trying to scam someone since he is removed from the deal. I do not believe that to be the case based on your post, I think you are an honest person who made a bad deal, and after you send it to RSC it will be good.

[77T]

IMHO this is a strange story and I'll wait to judge its merits since only one side has been disclosed.

But on the face of it, and based on my content analysis, the OP's departure from TRF is prolly best path for him.

Neither party to the trade are especially known - they've been here a few years and posted a bit - but I find no prior feedback in Who's Who.

Putting Alfred in the middle and besmirching his reputation solely because he sold the watch to Jim in the past is particularly poor form for the OP.

[mwatch]

To the OP, you got a watch that you don't like then focus on cancelling the trade and getting your watch back. Two things you did wrong IMHO, first you involved Alfred which is rediculous, second you are asking for a price adjustment which will always be a red flag to me.

[mfnj]

I am willing to cut the OP some slack even though he should not have involved Alfred. Many of us have had that pit in the stomach feeling upon receiving a watch that wasn't as described or didn't live up to its description as we tried to figure out what to do. Dare I say we don't always act rational! Bezel misalignment and lose a night's sleep. Magnification issues, alert the media!! Deep scratch and dial issue, actions justifiable! I hope the OP gets it all sorted out to his satisfaction.

[nsumner]

[FNFZ4]

Gents,

I have never dealt with this individual. He was supposed to buy a 16570 White dial to complement his 216570 white dial that he acquired from one of my clients, Jim.

The transaction didnt take place because he said that the watch was not in the condition that he wanted.

After a few days, I received a call from this individual asking me if I can take the Polar 216570 and give him a Brand New one??? I told him that I do not even know him and I have never made any dealings with him.

He then proceeded to ask me about Rolex Warranty and why my watch was from another country. I informed him that is not an issue as the warranty of the manufacturer was international and honored globally. He proceeded to ask multiple questions as to why i wont replace the watch, what watches do I have for sale, and how can he get the dial fixed without going to RSC. after those questions, he proceeded to ask me again about the warranty that I already answered a few times during the conversation. So I asked him if he read the warranty card to make sure that he does have a card. He said he never read the card. I told him to read the card and it say international warranty and it will be honored globally and jokingly said except in Mars.

He then calls my client and threaten him that if he does not get $400 or his watch back that he will leave a review about Me and Jim. But I was never involved with this transaction.

[jmassey215]

Dear All,

Sorry for my delayed response and thanks for the opportunity to hear my side of the side of the scenario.

I contacted Eddie via TRF upon seeing his Omega GSOTM listed for trade. I mentioned that I had bought a new Rolex Polar Explorer II from Alfred (FNFZ4), a highly respected seller/member on TRF 2 months ago and had since worn the watch twice since owning it.

I mentioned to Eddie that I was burned once in the past and asked if he would be willing to find a trusted TRF member to serve as a middle-man to look at our watches and state his finding before completing the deal. We could pay the TRF member and for shipping both ways. This was really suggested to protect both our interests/assets. Eddie explained he was a little reluctant, given the added cost etc…

I was still a little hesitant until Eddie agreed to send his watch first, so I could see it and feel comfortable and I would send him the Polar Explorer II once all checked out ok. I felt much more confident in the deal after this.

We exchanged photos of our watches and I did tell Eddie that I did wear the watch twice and hopefully the photos I sent accurately verified its condition. He did ask if there were any dents or dings on the crystal or bezel and I said, it’s like brand new. The bracelet did have some light desk diving marks and the watch does have a faint scratch on the side case, but not as noticeable as Eddie seems to have photo shopped in the posting. I sent a slew of photos and asked if he needed any others to feel comfortable. I also sent feedback from deals on WUS that I had done.

I connected Eddie to Alfred via group text because he mentioned that he was looking for a making Explorer for his wife and I thought they could communicate if interested.

In any case, I did receive the watch the next day and was very happy with the condition. I in turn sent his watch overnight as described with tracking and fully insured, exactly as stated. I tracked the package online and contacted Eddie to ensure it was received and he was happy.

He said the watch had some desk diving marks and the faint mark on the case. I said that the watch was worn twice and this is common with any worn watch (and pictures were sent to verify its condition). I also explained that a good watchmaker can polish these out if it bothers you.

Fifteen minutes pass and I get a text saying the A on the dial was missing the left leg. I explained that I didn’t recall that error, but I would check with Alfred to see if he had any prior photos to verify this (the original dial photo I sent to Eddie didn’t show this).
This is where things went south. Eddie took it upon himself to contact Alfred and ask for a new replacement Polar Explorer II, without contacting me first. When Alfred didn’t give him what he wanted, he asked me to send him $400 and he would deal with it. I explained that I would not give him any $$ without trying to verify the dial issue. He then asked that I exchange our watches and go on our way.

This turn of events had me very skeptical and concerned.

Alfred called me soon after saying that Eddie called and demanded a new replacement and that I should be very careful about any further demands from Eddie. Alfred explained to Eddie that the watch is under full warranty and the dial could be replaced if he was unhappy. Eddie called me shortly thereafter saying Alfred was unprofessional and that he called the Rolex Service Center (RSC) saying the watch had to be returned to the original Rolex AD where purchased and have the issue dealt with. I told Eddie that Alfred is a very trustworthy and respected member/seller on TRF and I cannot believe this was the case. I also explained that the RSC wouldn’t do that, since the AD wouldn’t service this type of scenario onsite (they would have you send it to a RSC). Then Eddie divulged that the real reason is that he didn’t want the watch opened up at the RSC and it wouldn’t be the same condition if opened. I said the RSC deals with countless issues and routine servicing and would send the watch back looking like new.

Eddie clearly wasn’t happy and I said I wasn’t doing anything until Alfred got back to me with his accounting on the watch dial condition (which I said would be the next day). He said that was fine and would wait for my response. He then sent texts over the course of that night, saying he found the watch Alfred sold me on TRF and sent photos with the dial. These were stock photos with serial numbers blacked out. There was no way to tell this was the exact watch and the dial didn’t look like there was an error. Eddie also sent a group text to Alfred and I that same night saying Alfred shouldn’t be involved in this and I should just exchange his watch.

That night Alfred told me that he couldn’t find anything to support the dial issue and to be very careful of a possible scam and he didn’t want to be involved any further. I thanked him for all he had done and I too didn’t want him involved in this further.

I contacted Eddie and said that Alfred didn’t see anything wrong with the dial and if he had a problem to contact the RSC to have it replaced. Eddie of course was not happy and demanded that I exchange his watch back.

At this point, his erratic and irrational behavior had me question whether he had a fake or broken Rolex Explorer II that I would get if I exchanged his Omega. His lack of feedback or reputation on any forum didn’t help me, so I made the choice to tell him to deal with RSC to get the dial fixed.

He said he was going to keep the watch and write this up on all the forums. I said that was his right and I’ll be happy to respond to them. I did say that given his behavior and lack of feedback on these forums would be hard to convince TRF members that we did anything wrong. Alfred is a solid and trusted member and I’ve done numerous deals without anything other than superior service and communication.

This scenario has been extremely frustrating for me and makes me hesitant to do future deals outside of members with solid feedback/reputation.

I’ll end by saying that I pride myself on honesty and integrity. I haven’t done many deals on TRF, other than selling and trading with Alfred and David S. Williams. They can both verify what kind of person I am. Members on WUS can also speak to my integrity and honesty.

Hope this information is helpful and thanks for taking the time to read it

[Submariner2015]

Originally Posted by jmassey215

Dear All,

Sorry for my delayed response and thanks for the opportunity to hear my side of the side of the scenario.

I contacted Eddie via TRF upon seeing his Omega GSOTM listed for trade. I mentioned that I had bought a new Rolex Polar Explorer II from Alfred (FNFZ4), a highly respected seller/member on TRF 2 months ago and had since worn the watch twice since owning it.

I mentioned to Eddie that I was burned once in the past and asked if he would be willing to find a trusted TRF member to serve as a middle-man to look at our watches and state his finding before completing the deal. We could pay the TRF member and for shipping both ways. This was really suggested to protect both our interests/assets. Eddie explained he was a little reluctant, given the added cost etc…

I was still a little hesitant until Eddie agreed to send his watch first, so I could see it and feel comfortable and I would send him the Polar Explorer II once all checked out ok. I felt much more confident in the deal after this.

We exchanged photos of our watches and I did tell Eddie that I did wear the watch twice and hopefully the photos I sent accurately verified its condition. He did ask if there were any dents or dings on the crystal or bezel and I said, it’s like brand new. The bracelet did have some light desk diving marks and the watch does have a faint scratch on the side case, but not as noticeable as Eddie seems to have photo shopped in the posting. I sent a slew of photos and asked if he needed any others to feel comfortable. I also sent feedback from deals on WUS that I had done.

I connected Eddie to Alfred via group text because he mentioned that he was looking for a making Explorer for his wife and I thought they could communicate if interested.

In any case, I did receive the watch the next day and was very happy with the condition. I in turn sent his watch overnight as described with tracking and fully insured, exactly as stated. I tracked the package online and contacted Eddie to ensure it was received and he was happy.

He said the watch had some desk diving marks and the faint mark on the case. I said that the watch was worn twice and this is common with any worn watch (and pictures were sent to verify its condition). I also explained that a good watchmaker can polish these out if it bothers you.

Fifteen minutes pass and I get a text saying the A on the dial was missing the left leg. I explained that I didn’t recall that error, but I would check with Alfred to see if he had any prior photos to verify this (the original dial photo I sent to Eddie didn’t show this).
This is where things went south. Eddie took it upon himself to contact Alfred and ask for a new replacement Polar Explorer II, without contacting me first. When Alfred didn’t give him what he wanted, he asked me to send him $400 and he would deal with it. I explained that I would not give him any $$ without trying to verify the dial issue. He then asked that I exchange our watches and go on our way.

This turn of events had me very skeptical and concerned.

Alfred called me soon after saying that Eddie called and demanded a new replacement and that I should be very careful about any further demands from Eddie. Alfred explained to Eddie that the watch is under full warranty and the dial could be replaced if he was unhappy. Eddie called me shortly thereafter saying Alfred was unprofessional and that he called the Rolex Service Center (RSC) saying the watch had to be returned to the original Rolex AD where purchased and have the issue dealt with. I told Eddie that Alfred is a very trustworthy and respected member/seller on TRF and I cannot believe this was the case. I also explained that the RSC wouldn’t do that, since the AD wouldn’t service this type of scenario onsite (they would have you send it to a RSC). Then Eddie divulged that the real reason is that he didn’t want the watch opened up at the RSC and it wouldn’t be the same condition if opened. I said the RSC deals with countless issues and routine servicing and would send the watch back looking like new.

Eddie clearly wasn’t happy and I said I wasn’t doing anything until Alfred got back to me with his accounting on the watch dial condition (which I said would be the next day). He said that was fine and would wait for my response. He then sent texts over the course of that night, saying he found the watch Alfred sold me on TRF and sent photos with the dial. These were stock photos with serial numbers blacked out. There was no way to tell this was the exact watch and the dial didn’t look like there was an error. Eddie also sent a group text to Alfred and I that same night saying Alfred shouldn’t be involved in this and I should just exchange his watch.

That night Alfred told me that he couldn’t find anything to support the dial issue and to be very careful of a possible scam and he didn’t want to be involved any further. I thanked him for all he had done and I too didn’t want him involved in this further.

I contacted Eddie and said that Alfred didn’t see anything wrong with the dial and if he had a problem to contact the RSC to have it replaced. Eddie of course was not happy and demanded that I exchange his watch back.

At this point, his erratic and irrational behavior had me question whether he had a fake or broken Rolex Explorer II that I would get if I exchanged his Omega. His lack of feedback or reputation on any forum didn’t help me, so I made the choice to tell him to deal with RSC to get the dial fixed.

He said he was going to keep the watch and write this up on all the forums. I said that was his right and I’ll be happy to respond to them. I did say that given his behavior and lack of feedback on these forums would be hard to convince TRF members that we did anything wrong. Alfred is a solid and trusted member and I’ve done numerous deals without anything other than superior service and communication.

This scenario has been extremely frustrating for me and makes me hesitant to do future deals outside of members with solid feedback/reputation.

I’ll end by saying that I pride myself on honesty and integrity. I haven’t done many deals on TRF, other than selling and trading with Alfred and David S. Williams. They can both verify what kind of person I am. Members on WUS can also speak to my integrity and honesty.

Hope this information is helpful and thanks for taking the time to read it

Both of you have very detailed accounts and explanations but I tend to believe Eddie regarding his remarks pertaining to the physical/aesthetic issues he encountered with the watch upon delivery because of only 1 reason:

1.) a true scam artist would not likely deliver an authentic (and quite costly) good first...there would be too much to lose and con artists, my own opinion, do not take risks such as this under the aforementioned scenario.

The above being said, I think all parties should chalk this up to experience and possibly move on--in an ideal world, the transaction should be rescinded with Eddie covering the costs for all shipping involved from beginning to end...but I would imagine there are many who follow this thread that would disagree with my analysis and/or solution

But, at the very least, I'm glad all parties involved have chimed in as this gave a glimpse into each persons thought process--as a previous poster mentioned, there really is three sides to every story

[sickened1]

Originally Posted by Submariner2015

1.) a true scam artist would not likely deliver an authentic (and quite costly) good first...there would be too much to lose and con artists, my own opinion, do not take risks such as this under the aforementioned scenario.

The above being said, I think all parties should chalk this up to experience and possibly move on--in an ideal world, the transaction should be rescinded with Eddie covering the costs for all shipping involved from beginning to end...but I would imagine there are many who follow this thread that would disagree with my analysis and/or solution.

I agree with your analysis and the solution.

[TK-710]

What a joke. After reading all of this who knows who is right and who cares. My head hurts just reading this thread. Probably because out of the three involved parties only two can type a sentence.

OP why would you trade for a used watch over the Internet, sight unseen, disregard all fail safes the other party wants to use and then claim you got burned? Why would you even bring the trusted seller into this?

When you buy something used on eBay and you don't like it do you try returning it to the original department store?

You don't like the way he talked to you? I think you're lucky he talked to you at all! I've never talked to or done business FNFwhatever but that fact that he even entertained your lunicy tells me enough to know if I ever use a trusted seller it will be him. He has the patience of a saint.

Thanks for the recommendation and for leaving.

[Andad]

That gives another side to this saga.

I reads that the clasp scuff and case scratches were noted at the time of the sale.

I am just surprised given the usual high level of inspection of our watches on the Forum that two of the previous owners of this watch didn't notice the missing leg on the 'A'?

This imperfection looks pretty clear in the pix?


PS. I am changing my name on the Forum from Eddie to Charles.

[jmassey215]

Originally Posted by directioneng

That gives another side to this saga.



I reads that the clasp scuff and case scratches were noted at the time of the sale.



I am just surprised given the usual high level of inspection of our watches on the Forum that two of the previous owners of this watch didn't notice the missing leg on the 'A'?



This imperfection looks pretty clear in the pix?





PS. I am changing my name on the Forum from Eddie to Charles.

Who's to say this picture wasn't photo shopped or altered by the person making this claim. I think that's the point of this who scenario. Neither of the previous owners recall this dial error.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TK-710]

Originally Posted by directioneng

That gives another side to this saga.

I reads that the clasp scuff and case scratches were noted at the time of the sale.

I am just surprised given the usual high level of inspection of our watches on the Forum that two of the previous owners of this watch didn't notice the missing leg on the 'A'?

This imperfection looks pretty clear in the pix?


PS. I am changing my name on the Forum from Eddie to Charles.

I don't think it's clear in the photo. The Op stated the leg was missing. That's a gross exaggeration. It seems to be partially faded at best. It might not be perfect but it certainly is not missing. Either way it was done by Rolex and not by any of the previous owners who may or may not have even noticed it.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by JES77

I don't think it's clear in the photo. The Op stated the leg was missing. That's a gross exaggeration. It seems to be partially faded at best. It might not be perfect but it certainly is not missing. Either way it was done by Rolex and not by any of the previous owners who may or may not have even noticed it.

Some might say somantics.

If I were to describe this as missing a leg on the 'A' I would feel somewhat justified because the leg is not there.
That two TRF sellers didn't notice this surprised me

[DCgator]

Originally Posted by directioneng

Some might say somantics.

If I were to describe this as missing a leg on the 'A' I would feel somewhat justified because the leg is not there.
That two TRF sellers didn't notice this surprised me

Totally agree with your observation.

[maxheifetz]

I did a deal with Alfred almost a month ago on a watch that was extremely smooth and Alfred was gracious. OP should know better than to call someone out on a thread like that...when said someone wasn't even involved.

[frequentflyer]

Sounds like the OP got traders remorse.

[bradj]

Any chance the OP has the photos detailing the condition of the watch prior to the trade? Seems like both sides had valid concerns during the transaction.

[GB-man]

Aye carumba!

1) this has nada to do with Alfred

2) op should send the watch to rsc.

3) op should request high quality pictures of watch before next transaction and scrutinize thoroughly.

[Daryl]

interesting

[repoman]

Trading an Omega GSOTM for a Rolex... what were you thinking?

joking aside...

My opinion only.. if you say "like brand new" and then follow that up with two *not* like brand new issues, then, I'm sorry, its not "like brand new". Those look to be minor wear marks (especially the clasp which is negligible) that are easily dealt with, and many of us would overlook the representation as "like brand new".... but when sellers/traders use language like this, its easy to understand why expectations get all screwed up.

[BrazenC5]

It's interesting, the implication of photo shopping the scratch on the case...if true, would like to see the original high res photo from Jim to compare.

On a separate note, it's disappointing to hear RSC try and steer you to an AD for replacement. A luxury brand manufacturer should take care of the dial without giving a story about opening up a new watch for warranty work...sounds like they're trying to pass the buck.

Sent from my Galaxy S6 using Tapatalk

[FNFZ4]

if he didn't demanded a brand new watch I would have helped him. I have done that before when I had to step in and help a member out because he was not satisfied with the watch he received because it needed a service and the seller didn't want to pick up the tab. I do that when any member needs it and I can help.

But this guy called me and demanded I help him get a new watch and asked me a million questions that I have answered about Rolex warranty only in the end to tell me he does not want the watch opened because it would not be the same??? Then I knew something was off. There was no help I can provide as this guy really expects a Brand New replacement watch. First, I didn't sell him the watch. I never had any dealings with him.

If he asked me "hey can you help me claim warranty" I would say sure. I have connections with the RSC and they will be glad to warranty the watch no problem. But when you call a seller who you are asking for help and start demanding crazy things like you want a brand new watch, well I think you need some other type of help and that's something I don't provide.

[mfnj]

Cutting out all the hyperbole and OP's ill advised attempt to involve Alfred, let's cut to the chase! He received a watch which he perceived did not match his expectations plus there is what appears to be a defect on the dial that may not have been noticed by previous owners. I don't know what the terms of the trade were but upon prompt notification to the other party a reversal of the transaction is not out of order. The question becomes at what point does prompt not apply and the proper course of action defaults to RSC for the dial issue?

[Submariner2015]

Originally Posted by mfnj

Cutting out all the hyperbole and OP's ill advised attempt to involve Alfred, let's cut to the chase! He received a watch which he perceived did not match his expectations plus there is what appears to be a defect on the dial that may not have been noticed by previous owners. I don't know what the terms of the trade were but upon prompt notification to the other party a reversal of the transaction is not out of order. The question becomes at what point does prompt not apply and the proper course of action defaults to RSC for the dial issue?

Agreed

[jmassey215]

Thanks to everyone who has taken the time to read this thread and weigh in with their thoughts.

Let me just say that this was my deal and I take full responsibility for it. I'm sorry that my friend, Alfred, was dragged into this whole debacle. Alfred is very respectable member/seller and should be trusted with the utmost confidence. I hope no one passes undue judgement on him because of this.

Whatever your opinion is of me and how this situation was handled, I can completely understand and accept.

I regret this issue couldn't have been dealt amicably by myself and the other member.

His pattern of unrealistic and irrational behavior/demands were immediate cause for concern and this factored into the decision that was made.

I'll end by saying this was a learning experience for me and I'll be much more careful in future dealings (so this scenario is never repeated again).

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by jmassey215

Thanks to everyone who has taken the time to read this thread and weigh in with their thoughts.

Let me just say that this was my deal and I take full responsibility for it. I'm sorry that my friend, Alfred, was dragged into this whole debacle. Alfred is very respectable member/seller and should be trusted with the utmost confidence. I hope no one passes undue judgement on him because of this.

Whatever your opinion is of me and how this situation was handled, I can completely understand and accept.

I regret this issue couldn't have been dealt amicably by myself and the other member.

His pattern of unrealistic and irrational behavior/demands were immediate cause for concern and this factored into the decision that was made.

I'll end by saying this was a learning experience for me and I'll be much more careful in future dealings (so this scenario is never repeated again).

So do you accept that the watch you traded to him had an imperfect dial, and will you be offering a return?

[susuki1220]

1. People wonder why Alfred was involved in this whole mess.

Alfred was involved because Jim would not trade back my watch and he is asking the original seller Alfred to confirm/agree that there was no defect on the watch when it passed both hands. Which at the end Alfred said he did not see the defect which prompt Jim not returning my watch and thinking that i was scamming. [ So it became a 2 person opinion is all of a sudden VS me having the watch on hand and i see the missing leg ??? ]

Both of them never asked for more photos, of course they probably think i have the time to tweak all of them via photoshop prior to sending. I can sent you 100+ photos of the watch instantly and you can judge if i have the time to photo shop 100 in a split second. I can even go to a public area taking a photo of a clock in the background proving you it is live.



2. During the phone call Alfred said i demanded a new watch.

I would say demand is a harsh word Alfred , i asked if there was any possibility of getting a watch since there was the defect. Knowing you are a so call reputable seller or member here i thought i asked and the fact that you were the original seller of the watch somehow makes me think that you may possibility do something. If the answer was "no i can't" that is completely fine understanding the situation hence i asked about the warranty question.
[I wish i had the recording of the phone call then people on the forum would know the way you talked when i called ]

If i have questions and i walked into a rolex AD, i wish their employee wouldn't be so offended if i asked them about how the warranty works or if any watch is replaceable. I'm sure the worse answer would just be a "NO" from them.

Its ok Alfred, i know you didn't want to be in this but Jim is your buddy and you need to back him up so he can buy more watches from you later.




3. I will go to RSC for sure with this watch ask to see if they can provide a detail photo of the missing/faded "A". That would be hardcore evidence. with something signed so people don't think i'm doing photoshop again.

Not sure if even after that Alfred will still not admit he missed something from the very beginning. People always miss things i totally understand, and no one is perfect ! But being able to admit your mistake over your ego i know is hard. But you need to be a man and do the right thing





4. Alfred, by not admitting that the original watch sold had a defect even with the exact photo shown in your original post [and also trying to lie saying it is a stock photo ?? It reads the exact same serial number on my watch ] and standing on the side of Jim and not being a independent 3rd party judging this trade is the exactly why you are involved.

Your decision and word determined if i will get my watch back, but you decided to use your reputable and just wing it standing on Jim's side and don't want to look at the hard evidence.

[ I can post the texts involved and you can see why this mess had to involve Jim and Alfred the fact that Jim dragged Alfred in and not me, I just called Alfred for 2 questions since he was the original seller noted by Jim ]




When i have the time to fix the watch at RSC i will come back with the truth.

The thread is to benefit others that wants to be in the watch game to be careful of these so call trusted/reputable sellers as who you chose to deal with.

*note, i'm sure there other honest trusted/reputable sellers here on the forum so please judge for yourself.

That quote was so right from a previous member reply, there are 2 sides of the story and there is the truth




Oh, by the way, please don't try to tilt the threads by calling your buddies over or try to create new accounts to reply this thread. I already saw a few post got deleted by the Mod.

Eddie