Sellers who flip fossils while claiming they personally discovered it - Is it technically a scam?

[-Andy-]

Hi all,

 

One of our members recently sold an incredible T-Rex tooth on the good ol' auction site for a very modest price. Problem is - the winner is a big-time seller on that auction site, which ticked off my red flags.

 

Lo and behold, before the original listing had even vanished, the same tooth is up on buyout again, this time at more than twice the won price. What grates me most of all is that the flipper had the audacity to claim:

 

1) They personally guarantee all information posted on location is correct

2) Said fossil was personally discovered by their team

Some of you might know which tooth and which seller I'm referring to. Is this technically a scam, and worth reporting?

 

- Andy

[caldigger]

OK I will attempt to tackle this. 

Technically speaking, they "discovered" it on the auction site (and bought it). 

Secondly, the information is guaranteed to be as correct as it was from the last seller. Scam wise...kinda yes. Sounds like they are attempting to add more credibility to their items than should be. Not sure if "the auction site" will do much since they are just repeating information that was on the item in the first place (which didn't raise any red flags).  They are not actually trying to label something that it isn't eg: saying it is a dinosaur tooth when it is a horse tooth.  I have to say the present seller has a somewhat low level of scruples, but that site has a fairly high percentage of sellers just trying to get that extra buck from buyers.

[FossilDudeCO]

I think the real problem is point 2. Them claiming they personally found it.

But that would be extremely difficult to prove in court (in most cases)

Dishonest yes, illegal, probably not. (Unfortunately!)

[Fossildude19]

A very shaky case could probably be made by the current seller that the person they purchased from is part of their "team".   

 

[FossilDudeCO]

1 minute ago, Fossildude19 said:

A very shaky case could probably be made by the current seller that the person they purchased from is part of their "team".   

 

That is a good point Tim.

I assume you are thinking a "I paid them so they work for me scenario"?

 

I think basically the original seller would not only have to dispute it but then prove they are the EXACT same item.

[Fossildude19]

1 minute ago, FossilDudeCO said:

 

I assume you are thinking a "I paid them so they work for me scenario"?

 

 

Exactly. 

[caldigger]

So all of the current seller's distributors are all part of his team and thus employees?  His workmans comp. payments must be sky high. Lol

[Fruitbat]

Personally, whether legal or not, I find the second claim to be ethically objectionable.

 

-Joe

[ynot]

I would avoid anything from that dealer, or any dealer that condoned similar practices.

 

Tony

[jpc]

I will go ahead and take the view of YES... this is a load of huey.  This guy should be strung up by his small toes.  OK, that is a bit extreme, but yes if there are ways to call him on the web site, by all means don't let me stop you.  The original seller by no means is 'part of the team'.  If I were the original seller, I would be #####.  

[Kane]

Report the seller. It will be a benefit to ptential buyers,

[JohnJ]

3 hours ago, -Andy- said:

Hi all,

 

One of our members recently sold an incredible T-Rex tooth on the good ol' auction site for a very modest price. Problem is - the winner is a big-time seller on that auction site, which ticked off my red flags.

 

Lo and behold, before the original listing had even vanished, the same tooth is up on buyout again, this time at more than twice the won price. What grates me most of all is that the flipper had the audacity to claim:

 

1) They personally guarantee all information posted on location is correct

2) Said fossil was personally discovered by their team

Some of you might know which tooth and which seller I'm referring to. Is this technically a scam, and worth reporting?

 

- Andy

 

You might contact the seller directly and let them know the ad is, at the least, misleading.  If the ad stays the same, you could report it on the auction site.

 

Andy, I'm sure you remember the legal liabilities which prevent TFF from being a venue for naming the parties involved.  Thank you for generalizing your question.  I don't know of any collector's website with enough funding to defend the libel suits of offended sellers.

[Susan from PA]

This tooth has been for sale on the auction site since I sold it in August.  I had the opportunity to purchase a fully rooted T.rex tooth, a specimen that rarely becomes available, so I sold a few of my specimens in order to raise the funds to do so.  (I'll share this tooth in member collections when I receive it, as it is still being prepped.).   

 

I have seen this listing many times, and I did not contact the auction site because the fossil itself was not misrepresented.  The description and locality were correct.  Therefore, I figured there wasn't much that could be done, and flipping is a common practice in the fossil business.  

 

At the same time, I did sell a Tyrannosaurid indet. tooth from the Judith River Formation as well.  I went out of my way on the desscrption to explain that this was not a T.rex tooth.  That tooth was placed back on the auction site by the buyer, (a different person than referred to in the original post)  and was described as a T.rex tooth from the Hell Creek formation for 10 times the price he paid.  That made my blood boil, and I told him to remove the listing or I was contacting the auction site.  It was immediately removed.  

 

Unfortunately, one cannot control who purchases his or her fossils when placed up for auction.  Sometimes, it's a dealer who you know is just going to flip it days later.   

 

I've been collecting dinosaur fossils exclusively for 6 years now, and I've been scammed more than I care to share.  I'm not going to share those incidents with the forum, due to the charters regarding the legality of doing so.  If you collect dinosaur fossils, and this is the most egregious act you've been a part of, consider yourself lucky.  In this case, I felt although the seller didn't actually "discover" the tooth, it was described accurately, and therefore didn't warrant the "wrath of Sue" that the other flipper of fossils experienced. .  

[-Andy-]

13 minutes ago, Susan from PA said:

This tooth has been for sale on the auction site since I sold it in August.  I had the opportunity to purchase a fully rooted T.rex tooth, a specimen that rarely becomes available, so I sold a few of my specimens in order to raise the funds to do so.  (I'll share this tooth in member collections when I receive it, as it is still being prepped.).   

 

I have seen this listing many times, and I did not contact the auction site because the fossil itself was not misrepresented.  The description and locality were correct.  Therefore, I figured there wasn't much that could be done, and flipping is a common practice in the fossil business.  

 

At the same time, I did sell a Tyrannosaurid indet. tooth from the Judith River Formation as well.  I went out of my way on the desscrption to explain that this was not a T.rex tooth.  That tooth was placed back on the auction site by the buyer, (a different person than referred to in the original post)  and was described as a T.rex tooth from the Hell Creek formation for 10 times the price he paid.  That made my blood boil, and I told him to remove the listing or I was contacting the auction site.  It was immediately removed.  

 

Unfortunately, one cannot control who purchases his or her fossils when placed up for auction.  Sometimes, it's a dealer who you know is just going to flip it days later.   

 

I've been collecting dinosaur fossils exclusively for 6 years now, and I've been scammed more than I care to share.  I'm not going to share those incidents with the forum, due to the charters regarding the legality of doing so.  If you collect dinosaur fossils, and this is the most egregious act you've been a part of, consider yourself lucky.  In this case, I felt although the seller didn't actually "discover" the tooth, it was described accurately, and therefore didn't warrant the "wrath of Sue" that the other flipper of fossils experienced. .  

 

Hi Susan, I made this thread before you replied me. Yeah, the seller isn't misrepresenting said fossil, so my beef is really with his claim "it was his team".

 

I know which seller you are talking about. He did the same to some random dromaeosaur teeth as well.

 

Sadly, there are some powerful dealers who've threatened legal action against TFF in the past, so it's a risk we can't afford. We'll just have to be extra vigilant and warn each other whenever we spot one.

[Troodon]

Andy this type of issue is at the bottom my list when it comes to the problems associated with online or auction sellers of dinosaur material..   Flipping is normal in the business and this seller is just using a pre-established custom layout that he has set up to sell his collected material.  Unfortunately he did remove or could not easily remove his guarantee comments that his team collected it, intentional or not hard to say.  My guess it was an oversite or just being lazy not to have to set up another layout.  The specimen was properly described and that's what matters and I'm not going to scold him for wanting to make a profit.  The market will decide if it sells.   

 

That's not the case with other dealers and I'm amazed that we still buy from them knowing a history of misrepresentation.   We seem to ignore that fact, when we see something we like and assume that for that item it's properly described.   Lots of collectors have a double standard and in the end it will burn them.   Sellers who have a history of deceptive practices will not stop.

[-Andy-]

18 minutes ago, Troodon said:

That's not the case with other dealers and I'm amazed that we still buy from them knowing a history of misrepresentation.   We seem to ignore that fact, when we see something we like and assume that for that item it's properly described.   Lots of collectors have a double standard and in the end it will burn them.   Sellers who have a history of deceptive practices will not stop.

 

Sigh... Guilty as charged.

[Susan from PA]

30 minutes ago, -Andy- said:

 

Sigh... Guilty as charged.

I'm guilty as charged as well.   Sometimes, it's hard to pass up that one of a kind.  

[ynot]

But then there are the great pieces that have been misidentified as something common. So I guess it balances out in the end.

 

Tony

[Troodon]

32 minutes ago, ynot said:

But then there are the great pieces that have been misidentified as something common. So I guess it balances out in the end.

 

Tony

You have to be kidding....

[ynot]

9 minutes ago, Troodon said:

You have to be kidding....

Yah, I guess so.

I would find it hard to buy anything from a dealer that I knew had intentionally misrepesented anything.

But I have trust issues to begin with.

 

Tony

[FossilDAWG]

Side tangent alert!!  Also trivial pet peeve alert!!

 

For some reason I find myself getting annoyed at how the word "found" is used by different people.

 

Case 1: "Look at this great fossil I found".  The finder spent a long time researching geological and paleontological papers, then matching geological and topographic maps to identify potentially productive outcrops. After spending more time cultivating relationships with landowners to get permission to access the outcrops, they revisited the sites at intervals over several years.  Eventually they were there at the right time and place to collect an exceptional specimen, which then took many hours with expensive tools to prep.  The prep was well done because of the hundreds of hours the collector had invested in honing their skills.  Ultimately the collector was able to accurately ID the fossil because of the hundreds or thousands of hours they had invested in learning the literature.

 

Case 2: "Look at this great fossil I found".  The finder spent a few hours perusing online links, then purchased a specimen.

 

I understand that not everyone lives where they can collect their own specimens, or they have other circumstances that prevent them getting out in the field.  I also understand that people have assembled great collections through purchasing, and they have also invested the time and effort to really understand the literature and develop deep expertise.  My "complaint" is only that the word "found" is used for such completely different activities.  My own bias is to assume someone actually discovered a specimen in the field when they say they found it, but I suppose that may reflect my own preference to self-collect.  However I don't know what word better fits the buying situation.

 

Don

[Troodon]

51 minutes ago, ynot said:

Yah, I guess so.

I would find it hard to buy anything from a dealer that I knew had intentionally misrepesented anything.

But I have trust issues to begin with.

 

Tony

 

Good man, it's all about trust when dealing with suppliers and once that's gone how can one believe anything they say.  

[ynot]

31 minutes ago, FossilDAWG said:

I don't know what word better fits the buying situation.

acquired, purchased, bought.

 

Tony

[FossilDAWG]

1 hour ago, ynot said:

acquired, purchased, bought.

 

Tony

Well OK, if you want to go for the obvious!  

Don

[LordTrilobite]

Kinda disgusting that people are willing to mislead people like that to make them seem more trustworthy. Kinda ironic.

 

Personally I never buy anything that I find is overpriced anyway.