This is very unfortunate and very disappointing. It is my understanding that the seller actually had the violin examined and certified to be authentic. It is also my understanding that the seller advised the buyer of this. It is my understanding that the buyer purchased the violin for $2,500 knowing the violin was certified authentic. Him forgetting afterwards is not the seller's problem, but the buyer's. It is my understanding that the seller contacted Paypal accusing the seller of selling a false product. Paypal advised to destroy it. Why do I write in such an elementary style? It helps me see the facts and leads to the conclusion that the buyer wrongly filed for SNAD. We don't know what measures the buyer took to prove with tangible evidence that the violin was fake. We do know the seller had tangible evidence certifying the violin's authenticity. This is an unacceptable form of fraud as the buyer was advised of the authenticity. Furthermore, upon destroying the violin, the buyer took a picture of the destroyed violin showing a label of authenticity on one of the destroyed interior pieces. He then sent it to the buyer. This, of course, can serve as more proof. It is my opinion that Paypal needs to reverse their opinion, charge the buyer $2,500, and transfer it to the seller. Otherwise, Paypal owes the seller $2,500. I am of the opinion that Paypal does not have sufficient tangible evidence to substantiate the buyer's claims. Whereas word of mouth accusations are heresay without tangible proof, the seller is in the right. Too bad things aren't always this clear. If I were the seller, I would file a federal complaint against the buyer. In this case, the buyer committed fraud and the seller can prove she was right. www.ic3.gov I think that if this isn't resolved and the seller feels even more defrauded, someone else will be added to the complaint. Never mind the media. This is federally sanctioned.
... View more