--- forwarded message, please reply to sender and MMD ---

 [ Editor's note:
 [
 [ Brian Chesters wrote on this subject in Digest 98.04.25, telling
 [ his story as the seller of a music box which suffered severe
 [ damage in shipment from England to the USA.  In Digest 98.04.28
 [ the buyer, Ken Danckaert, replied with his side of the story.  The
 [ views of other MMDers on the situation appeared in subsequent
 [ Digests.
 [
 [ The discussion centers on who is to bear the cost of the ruined
 [ music box: the seller (Brian), the buyer (Ken), the shipping agent
 [ or the insurance company?
 [
 [ The cost of an international lawsuit greatly exceeds the value
 [ of the music box, and so the matter now effectively rests in
 [ the "court of public opinion" here at Mechanical Music Digest.
 [ Jody and I want to publish all the public correspondence we
 [ can ('public' means the author grants permission to publish),
 [ because we want our readers to learn of the hazards of
 [ shipping musical instruments.
 [
 [ Ken Danckaert said earlier that he planned to place the collected
 [ correspondence at his web site:
 [
 [    http://research.umbc.edu/~kend/
 [
 [ -- Robbie


Hi,  My name is Stuart Caplan.  I've been collecting Thomas A. Edison
items (including phonographs) and early mechanical-electrical devices
since 1974.  Came across your site by accident and I am thoroughly
impressed with the content and continual daily updates.

In reviewing past articles, I came across two that were very disturbing
("Untrue Allegations") because of a similar personal experience that
happened to me.

I had purchased an Edison Kinetoscope from a dealer in Ohio.  Upon
arrival, via United Parcel Service (UPS), the box had been crushed,
parts of the machine had which had been packed separately had collided
with one another.  In short, the item I had purchased (which was a
'project' machine to begin with) became a basket case.

The fault in damages were obviously due to mishandling by UPS, but also
very poor packing on the part of the Seller.  My case differs twofold,
in that (1) The transaction between Seller/Buyer happened within the
U.S., and (2) the issue was resolved, but only after I involved an
attorney and initiated a lawsuit against the Seller.  With this
experience behind me, I'd like to comment on the issue, Untrue
Allegations,  published on your web site.


(A)  Mr. Chesters' Liability.  Wherein Mr. Chesters may be right in
stating that Ownership of the item passed to the buyer upon receiving
sufficient funds, responsibility for safe delivery stayed with Mr.
Chesters.  The contract between Buyer/Seller, whether verbal or written,
guarantees safe delivery (Warranty Of Sale), regardless of how Owner-
ship is perceived, until the goods are in the hands of the Buyer.
There is not one person, including Mr. Chesters, that would buy some-
thing without such a guarantee, whether directly discussed or not.

This leads to the matter of shipping.  The contract is always between
the person paying directly for the service and the shipper, regardless
of where the funds come from.  In this case it is Mr. Chesters.  When
a damage claim was filed, who had to initiate it, who did the shipper
communicate with, and who did the shipper send the original settlement
check to? -- the person the shipper was liable to, Mr. Chesters (not
Mr. Danckaert).

Regarding the amount of the settlement check, I am only aware of the
terms of shipping services in the States where the first $100 of
insurance is free.  Coincidentally, wasn't this the amount of the
shipper's settlement check to Mr. Chesters?


(B)  Mr. Chesters' Defense.  Is there any?  Mr. Chesters discloses what
he paid for the music box (at Phillips!) and what he sold it to Mr.
Danckaert for.

What is the point here?  Are we to assume that because Mr. Chesters
did not make a respectable profit off the piece that he is relieved
of packing it properly?  Remember that the claim was settled so actual
damages have been verified and are on record!  Mr. Chesters notes that
he shipped another package to a Mr. Mooney in California, at the same
time, and that this package arrived safely.  Once again, what is the
point?  Mr. Danckaert's package was shipped to Maryland (East coast of
the U.S.).  Mr. Mooney's was shipped to California (West coast of the
U.S.).  Obviously, the packages took different routes.

Perhaps Mr. Chesters should disclose to us how much profit he made
off the piece he sold to Mr. Mooney!  Mr. Chesters, in trying to paint
himself in a "nice guy" image, states that he filed and sent in the
claim form to the shipper.  I contend that this was the only way the
claim could be initiated since the contract for shipment was only
between Mr. Chesters and the Shipper.  He further states that he is
willing to go to trial against the shipper, on behalf of Mr.
Danckaert, for free.  Who is pulling wool over who's eyes?


(C)  Summary.  Mr. Danckaert's case is not against the shipper, but
rather Mr. Chesters.  In this case, Mr. Chesters has an entire ocean to
hide behind in eluding justice ... if he wanted to!  In my case, I did
not have access to the Internet until after we settled.  Since being on
the Internet, I have come across numerous other buyers who have had bad
experiences with my Seller!

Now, Mr. Chesters went to great lengths in taking the initiative to
defend his reputation.  I believe he needs to take one further step
and take back the music box he sold to Mr. Danckaert (the innocent
party in this nightmare) and return his money.  I, for one, would never
knowingly buy from someone without such a policy!

The strength in a web site, such as this, is not only the focal point
for gathering and expressing information, but also to unit to better
the hobby and the marketplace.  In this case ("Untrue Allegations"),
it is clear that there were and are misunderstandings.  Hopefully,
cooler heads will prevail and the issue will be resolved amicably.
I welcome your comments.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to express my comments on this
matter, and for having a great web site.  Continue the great work!

Best regards.

Stuart Caplan

 [ Thanks for your articulate letter, Stuart.  Hope you'll visit
 [ us again!  -- Robbie