Sounds very plausible, And as you say, it could have been sorted all to easily compared with what has now become a nightmare for all involved. Reading this as someone in the trade, i really feel for both parties.
Quote Originally Posted by sq225917 View Post
Stepping back a little.

Here's what's likely.

John took the order, typically assumed the buyer understood that it was a re-manufactured amp, new clean case etc on old guts but with new tubes. Shipped it, complete, with one package strapped to the other which would be considered as 'one of one' by the courier. The small package fell off, John thought the buyer an overly aggressive ass-clown and treated him as such fearing that he'd never see the amp back if he refunded him and we end up down the line where we are in this thread. It perfectly explains John's willingness to openly state to the court that it was not a brand new unit.

I don't think he's trying to pull a fast one. I think Geoff is a demanding and aggressive customer who got the wrong end of the stick re John 'building him a new amp' and has worked forward from that lack of communication into an entrenched position. There may be other mitigating factors on both sides. The simple solution would have been for John to arrange for a trusted party to inspect and collect the amp and hand over the cash back to Geoff. Instead he chose the suicidal move of ignoring a valued customer and compounded this stupidity by ignoring the courts.

The only recovery for John is to inspect and collect the amp, issue a refund and work with the buyer to deal with the issue of court costs. With a bit of luck he could come out of this with as little as £250 out of pocket- which I might add is a fine price for saving your credibility. Any attempt to do otherwise has to be seen as a bad move.

Sometimes it doesn't matter if you're right or wrong you just have to suck it up and move on. Hopefully John can see this and make the right call.