And that whole "runs perfect" thing is in writing, in the advertisement. So, it's easily provable.

5/31/2012 3:33:53 PM

^there is no hard evidence that it did not "run perfect" on the test ride OR that he knew that would be the last time that it ran

5/31/2012 3:35:57 PM

Quote :

"^there is no hard evidence that it did not "run perfect" on the test ride OR that he knew that would be the last time that it ran"

That will be up to the Small Claims Court judge after he listens to testimony from mechanics (if it ever gets that far). From the story being told, it seems pretty obvious.

That also doesn't change your stance on "as is, no warranty"....which is incorrect.

[Edited on May 31, 2012 at 3:39 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on May 31, 2012 at 3:40 PM. Reason : I'm starting to think beatsunc sold him the bike or knows the guys who sold him the bike...]

5/31/2012 3:39:25 PM

I think it is reasonable argument that the advertisement communicated an implied warranty, but that's up to the judge should you decide to file a small claims case against him.

In the future you should ask either for a warranty or to have a mechanic inspect it beforehand rather than afterwords.

[Edited on May 31, 2012 at 3:42 PM. Reason : ]

5/31/2012 3:42:11 PM

^^could you provide a link to the warranty that all used cars come with in spite of what the window sticker clearly states

5/31/2012 3:57:05 PM

what about the analysis of the actual engine damage

you fucks can get lost in the wording...well, what about the bike?

Quote :

" I went out to meet the guy, and sure enough the bike started on the first kick. I didn't know how to ride and didn't want to mess something up I hadn't bought yet, so I had him take it up and down the street and it ran great."

if it ran great the moment he purchased it, what was wrong with it in the first place? Engines with bottom-end (or catastrophic) damage dont just 'run great'. I'm still waiting on pictures/explainations of the engine damage... as I have posted before.

5/31/2012 3:59:07 PM

Quote :

"^^could you provide a link to the warranty that all used cars come with in spite of what the window sticker clearly states"

Can you provide a link to the window sticker on this bike?

5/31/2012 4:04:22 PM

Quote :

"I'm starting to think beatsunc sold him the bike or knows the guys who sold him the bike"

i do not know anyone discussed itt. but i do know that i have sold many cars and motorcycles in the past and i have ZERO liability if they have failed to operate after i signed the title

[Edited on May 31, 2012 at 4:13 PM. Reason : f]

5/31/2012 4:12:56 PM

Hopeless.

5/31/2012 4:25:14 PM

^i would honestly enjoying reading any evidence you have that supports your position. hell i might be wrong.

5/31/2012 4:28:35 PM

What I've said (it feels like) a million times already....IS THAT YOU CAN'T MISREPRESENT WHAT YOU ARE SELLING.

You can't tell someone that you are selling them a bike that "runs perfectly" when it's a piece of shit that is breaking down and it costs more than what the bike is worth to fix it (now those are the details that the court has to decide).

But if it was indeed a lemon, and he advertised and told the OP that it "runs perfectly", and sold it because of that...then he's liable.

I'm sure you've sold plenty of people cars "as is, no warranty". If you tell them, "look, I've cranked it up and drove it around parking lot, and it seems fine"...and they but it and it fucks up...then that's their fault. But if you misrepresented to them what it was that they were buying by saying it was a car in perfect condition...when in fact it wasn't...your "as is, no warranty" doesn't mean shit.

My evidence is three years of law school and four years of practicing law and making idiots like you pay my legal fees. I don't need to give you evidence of common sense


[Edited on May 31, 2012 at 4:49 PM. Reason : .]

5/31/2012 4:34:13 PM

the point is that you are of course allowed to sell something as is, but if you don't represent it accurately as such in any of a number of ways prior to the sale, you can still be on the hook even though you have attempted to exculpate yourself from any warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

^ that

[Edited on May 31, 2012 at 4:37 PM. Reason : .]

5/31/2012 4:37:08 PM

^^ i was wondering how long it would take you start name calling. does that make you feel like a big man?

I dont believe in this case the seller said the bike was a newer model or anything that could be proven to be fraudulent. stuff breaks, sometimes it happens at a bad time. i feel sorry for the OP but i believe he has no case

5/31/2012 4:44:40 PM

No...but it helps to relieve my frustration when having discussions with people who don't know what they're talking about.

Bottom line..."as is, no warranty" does not allow you misrepresent what you're selling. Try and remember that when you are selling your vehicles in the future.

5/31/2012 4:48:48 PM

spoke with an attorney today for advice. he gave me some statues to sue under and said that it should be a fairly easy case to win. as jbrick has said, you can't just misrepresent something like this and I have a witness there that heard him say that it needed nothing and ran perfectly, the craigslist ad that said so, and a letter from the mechanic stating the massive amount of damage, the estimated cost to repair, etc.

Attorney said that because I called immediately after I got home saying it wasn't running, that I could legally revoke the acceptance of the bike. also, I can sue under implied warranty under the uniform commercial merchantability code.

5/31/2012 7:32:40 PM

Quote :

"I am failing to see the fraud. the bike ran immediately before being put in the van."

if dude said it "runs perfectly," then that means you set up the bike in the same way you would set up any other bike: put gas in it, put oil in it, put coolant in it, whatever, and it works, "perfectly," even. Yet, if what the mechanic says is true, and the guy had to run the bike outside of the normal parameters in order to make it look like the bike functioned correctly, then, by definition, the bike didn't "run perfectly," because he had to run the bike outside of its normal parameters and in a way that would be very injurious the the bike. That's the exact opposite of "runs perfectly." If you've got to jerry-rig the fucker to even get it to start in the first place, then it doesn't "run perfectly".
Moreover, another part of "runs perfectly" is "you can shut it off and it will work again the next time you try to use it, within reason." I'd say that "runs the next time I try to start it up, a few days later," is well "within reason".

5/31/2012 8:15:39 PM

I'm gonna have to see the catastrophic damage to believe something can go from working good to fubar instantly. Also, you should get another opinion from another mechanic to alleviate the idea that the one mechanic you have been to isn't blowing smoke up your ass.

Next time if you buy something you can't drive, bring a friend who can.

6/1/2012 11:26:17 AM

Quote :

"Next time if you buy something you can't drive, bring a friend who can. "

From the sound of it that wouldn't have made a difference.

^^ agreed.

Though I guess the possibility still exists that the mechanic is scamming...slight as it is.

6/1/2012 12:12:43 PM

mechanic is going to send me pictures, I just haven't had time to talk to him.

the reason it could run decently well and then not at all is because he probably put in a bunch of ether to get the motor to turn over, and then when it got hot it seized up.

there's no question I should have brought somebody who knew what they were doing but I had a lot of constraints on my time and a very small window of opportunity to get everything I needed together and like I said before, the mechanic thought it looked fine initially - and there is no reason for him to blow smoke up my ass because if he could have done a valve job or something minor, I wouldve paid it. but now that we're talking $2,000 worth of damage, he knows I'm not willing to spend that much so he just makes $100 to look at the bike. don't really see the motive

6/1/2012 1:16:33 PM

It sounds like it's going to be up to the judge. I can see how both arguments are valid...not really knowing much about the law except what I learned in civics class.

Anyway, I really think the guy sold you a shitty bike on purpose and I hope you get your money back. FWIW it would have gotten most people. One time I bought a Chevy LUV pickup from a guy in New Hill and the brakes went while I was on 440. They didn't totally go out but I had to replace the master cylinder and one of the brake calipers. After that it was a decent truck had oversized tires, roll bar, KC lights...anyway, hope this works out for you.

6/1/2012 1:40:32 PM

Quote :

"the reason it could run decently well and then not at all is because he probably put in a bunch of ether to get the motor to turn over, and then when it got hot it seized up. "

either mixed in gas does not cause an engine to sieze up.....however running with no oil will.

as well, if it had no oil there would be a distinct 'knock' that would be heard at all times when running.


did he rev it up and drive it fast for you? chances are it would have siezed instantly if he were 'riding hard'. your lack of a second opinion on the mechanical inspection concerns me.

6/1/2012 2:02:42 PM

He offered the seller's choice of mechanic, if the seller wanted to do that.

6/1/2012 2:23:27 PM

^^ I've seen a 2-stroke run for over 20 minutes with no oil before. It was an oil injected jet ski and the oil line popped off one cylinder. It started running poorly and the guy drove it 5 miles home. It wouldn' even plane out by the time he got back. If it's hot and the plugs are still firing a lot of times the issues don't appear (as noticeably) until you shut it off.

Granted, the ski had two other cylinders that were working fine to help turn the engine, but I could still crank it and run it briefly on land despite having been run for that long with no oil to the cylinder. Pulled the plugs and it was obvious something was terribly wrong with that cylinder. Ended up needing a new cylinder, piston, rings, etc.

[Edited on June 1, 2012 at 4:55 PM. Reason : s]

6/1/2012 4:43:26 PM

Emailing the defendant this thread.

6/1/2012 5:08:58 PM

So now it appears that the bike had no oil and that caused the damage?

6/1/2012 8:56:53 PM

I checked the oil and some came out so there was definitely something in there. but now sure how much or how long. the mechanic and I are playing phone tag but he said he'd give me some pictures and more explanation, which I'll relay to y'all

6/1/2012 9:22:48 PM

LOL

you know what they say about a fool and his money

6/1/2012 10:40:59 PM

Quote :

"I checked the oil and some came out so there was definitely something in there. but now sure how much or how long."

This may have been your gearbox oil. Top and bottom end of the engine is lubricated by the oil pre-mixed into gas in a two stroke. Some two strokes have oil injection, where oil is fulled into a separate tank and then injected into the fuel mixture, but even in that case you cant expect them to have a crankcase full of oil like four strokes do. You really need to get a full diagnosis from your mechanic (maybe even with some pictures), and let the armchair experts here take a stab at it.

6/1/2012 11:41:54 PM

He said it was a 4 stroke

which begs the question, why was anything mixed into the gas at all?

Anyhow, he hasn't shown us a single text, the original ad, shared the make/model, or even a picture of the bike. Pretty good chance this is a troll thread.

[Edited on June 2, 2012 at 8:19 AM. Reason : 454545445]

6/2/2012 8:18:17 AM

He's PMed many of those things. Whether or not this is a troll thread, I don't know, but I have seen everything on that list except for texts.

6/2/2012 10:30:57 AM

Quote :

"Pretty good chance this is a troll thread."

Derp derp

6/2/2012 6:20:42 PM

lol what would I have to gain by trolling any of you itt? and since when do I troll anyway?

I'm not going to post any specific information until the case is resolved because I don't want this guy to be harassed or anything. However, once the case is resolved, I'll post all of the relevant information (redacting his personal info) because I think it's an interesting case that not only myself, but many of you, may benefit from in the future while making similar transactions. Again, I wish I had it checked out properly but there were a lot of variables that didn't come together in my favor to have the time/resources to do so.

[Edited on June 3, 2012 at 5:36 PM. Reason : also, I texted him stuff but he called and we talked for 20 mins. there's no texts to show ]

6/3/2012 5:33:52 PM

Another 20 minutes? What do you talk about for that long?

6/3/2012 8:56:00 PM

no the original 20 minute conversation. basically repeated myself over and over.

6/3/2012 9:00:57 PM

pic of bike was posted in garage thread, it is 4-stroke



[Edited on June 3, 2012 at 9:47 PM. Reason : DOHCCCCCCCCCC]

6/3/2012 9:46:11 PM

Quote :

"basically repeated myself over and over."

I love how people do this when recording conversations.

6/4/2012 3:38:19 PM

So?

6/4/2012 5:33:45 PM

estimate to fix the bike is ~$3,500

I'll try to scan the list of parts / labor at work tm.

6/6/2012 8:11:43 PM

stupid is as stupid does

6/6/2012 8:58:39 PM

How about the pictures?

6/7/2012 12:15:18 AM

someone may have said this already.... It's going to cost you more money in court costs and lawyers than it is to buy a new bike, and there's no guarantee you'll get anything. I'd cut my losses and just call it a life lesson.

6/7/2012 8:22:21 AM

Anyone that brings a lawyer to small claims court is retarded. Unless you have a buddy or someone willing to do it for free I guess. In North Carolina it costs $96 to file a small court claims fee. If he's trying to get upwards of 2k back, I think 100 bucks is worth the risk to at least try and get it back if the time and process it takes is worth it to the person and knowing the fact that you may lose and be out that money and time.

6/7/2012 8:32:59 AM

I've talked to attorneys about the case I have not - and will not be hiring one. And yes I believe the ~$130 in court costs and getting a sheriff to serve him is well worth the $2,330 I'm suing for (bike plus shop fees of first shop and another for second opinion plus cost of court/sheriff). I'm not trying to litigate a case over 2k and I think I have a shot. Haters itt.

6/7/2012 8:56:19 AM

Sadly I doubt you'll get the money back. When my parents brought their GC to court he just turned around and filed for bankruptcy the next day when the judge ruled against him. They never got a dime back from the fraudulent jerk

6/7/2012 9:07:49 AM

That's when you file a lien against his personal property that's good for the next 10 years.

6/7/2012 9:12:17 AM

Yeah the guy conveniently didn't own anything except a shitty motorcycle. They put a lien on that but he'll run it into the ground before he sells it I'm sure.

6/7/2012 9:35:51 AM

The idea with a lien is that you can take your portion out of any future property he owns for the next 10 years. So, he can't buy a house, or a car, etc., without you having a lien against it. At the end of the 10 years, if they haven't bought any property and you haven't been paid, you can renew it for another 10 years.

[Edited on June 7, 2012 at 10:12 AM. Reason : It's a way of sticking it to the asshole that screwed you.]

6/7/2012 10:02:02 AM

[redacted the name of the mechanic, make/model, and phone number for mechanic]

Original Ad [redacted to hide identifying information regarding the bike/seller]



[Edited on June 7, 2012 at 3:55 PM. Reason : I'm still waiting on pictures. This guy takes forever to respond to anything. ]

[Edited on June 7, 2012 at 4:04 PM. Reason : please don't harass this guy ]

6/7/2012 3:54:31 PM

like I said, this is not trolling.

6/7/2012 4:05:36 PM

for the 1-millionth time, you are getting hosed by the mechanic

every goddamned part from the jug (cylinder) up is being listed as needed to be replaced....

wait

cylinder, head, crankshaft, cams, piston... what the fuck. you dont replace the cylinder and head like that! what was the description of the failure... for the 5th time!

[Edited on June 7, 2012 at 4:13 PM. Reason : -]

[Edited on June 7, 2012 at 4:14 PM. Reason : -]

6/7/2012 4:12:42 PM