genomicstime STAY FAR AWAY FROM ORIN MCCORMICK

[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....

[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.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Rags]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Gemonicstime - You left it too late, in my opinion. The seller is of good standing here and not in the business of selling fakes. Although to be honest, with so many listings comprising one barely-focused photo, I'm surprised he manages to sell anything on TRF.

The rules on selling watches say that "pics" not 1 picture must be posted along with the ad. All of ponycar350's for sale posts have just 1 picture. I believe a minimum of 4 should be posted. Just my opinion..

[swish77]

Originally Posted by Rags

The rules on selling watches say that "pics" not 1 picture must be posted along with the ad. All of ponycar350's for sale posts have just 1 picture. I believe a minimum of 4 should be posted. Just my opinion..

Well, I don't necessarily disagree with your point, but your statement is inaccurate. From the rules on TRF sales:

2. A For Sale post must contain the following information:
a. At least one clear picture of the actual watch being offered for sale or trade.

I just completed a deal with Jared, and I'm sure he'd be happy to provide as much information about a watch as requested, including additional photos, if needed.

[red1108nyc]

2 established facts:

1. Complaining after 6 months from the trade date = not cool.

2. Threat of violence = not cool.

[GSDLover]

Originally Posted by red1108nyc

2 established facts:

1. Complaining after 6 months from the trade date = not cool.

2. Threat of violence = not cool.

Maybe I missed something but i have not seen any proof of a threat. A screen shot of this threat would be easy proof, but it seems weak excuses are given to avoid such posting.
Im starting to doubt this threat happen.
Maybe i missed it somewhere in the two threads.