My response:
Well, if nothing else, the seller knows the definition of the word "fungible".
"Being of such a nature that one part or quantity may be replaced by another equal part or quantity in the satisfaction of an obligation."
So, if he can't get you on the "front end" price, he'll get you on the "back end" costs. Money is money, so it doesn't matter to him what the amounts are called or in what category the money is derived. It still amounts to the real, overall, purchase price of the computer.
But, what the seller wasn't counting on was the fact that his shipping and handling charges could very well be construed as being "unconscionable." If this situation comes down to a court battle, the court would undoubtedly find, as a matter of law, that the contract or any clause of the auction contract was unconscionable at the time it was made the court may refuse to enforce the contract, or it may enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause, or it may so limit the application of any unconscionable clause as to avoid any unconscionable result.
The problem for the seller would be to convince a court that his labor to buy and construct a shipping box, pack that box, and ship that box with the computer - - against comparable commercial costs for the same - - was "reasonable".
I believe that a court would see the "scam" for what it is, and to award the seller with the reasonable value of labor and materials to ship a similar box by commercial methods.
Additionally, at the price of $1,300.00, our buyer/writer would spend far less money to physically fly to the location of the seller and personally pick up the computer. Also, he could stay at a five star hotel and have the best meals on the menu, AND still pay less overall.
Let the seller sue you. Let him explain to a court why his labor and materials are worth their weight in gold!
IAAL
