• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Being sued by craigslist buyer for cosmetic damage on laptop I sold him used

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

saxplaya

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

My boyfriend sold my macbook pro (running mountain lion and with the full microsoft office suite, original price ~$1300) on craigslist a few days ago for $550. He included in the ad that there was minor cosmetic damage, and even sent the potential buyer pictures of the damage. The buyer said that it looked fine, met with us in person, tested the computer (including the hinge, which had a crack), and bought it.

Now, he is claiming that he went to the apple store and found that it will cost $375 to fix the broken hinge. His email was as follows:

Hey Brad, I'm at the apple store because the screen hinge needed to be tightened, but it's not the screws. The display is breaking and needs to be replaced which is $375. I'd like my $ back. I will return the computer at your convenience. Please contact me ASAP.


He was fully aware of the damage when he bought the computer--especially something so prominent as the hinge crack. He moved the screen back and forth to test this and seemed satisfied (he bought it anyway). He is threatening to take us to small claims court because we refuse to issue a refund. The computer was sold as-is and was fully functional even with the hinge issue. I would like to know: does he have any case at all in small claims court? Any advice would be very much appreciated.
 
Last edited:


sandyclaus

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

My boyfriend sold my macbook pro (running mountain lion and with the full microsoft office suite, original price ~$1300) on craigslist a few days ago for $550. He included in the ad that there was minor cosmetic damage, and even sent the potential buyer pictures of the damage. The buyer said that it looked fine, met with us in person, tested the computer (including the hinge, which had a crack), and bought it.

Now, he is claiming that he went to the apple store and found that it will cost $375 to fix the broken hinge. His email was as follows:

Hey Brad, I'm at the apple store because the screen hinge needed to be tightened, but it's not the screws. The display is breaking and needs to be replaced which is $375. I'd like my $ back. I will return the computer at your convenience. Please contact me ASAP.


He was fully aware of the damage when he bought the computer--especially something so prominent as the hinge crack. He moved the screen back and forth to test this and seemed satisfied (he bought it anyway). He is threatening to take us to small claims court because we refuse to issue a refund. The computer was sold as-is and was fully functional even with the hinge issue. I would like to know: does he have any case at all in small claims court? Any advice would be very much appreciated.
You identified potential cosmetic damage in your ad. The potential buyer was notified about the damage, and given an opportunity to fully examine and inspect it before completing his purchase. The fact that the buyer was not fully aware of what it might cost to fix that damage is not your problem - it's THEIRS. Tell them once and for all to pound sand, and stop communicating with hum.

Let him sue you. When/if he does, you can have the ad in hand to show the court that you fully disclosed the problem, and state that the buyer bought it anyway. I can't honestly see that the judge would even consider ruling in their favor.
 

tranquility

Senior Member
While caveat emptor applies,
The display is breaking and needs to be replaced
if the computer was advertised with only cosmetic damage and there was actual functional damage, you may have a problem.

True, the buyer's inspection is a problem for him. Accepting the computer is going to be hard to reverse.

I'd try to work out a deal.
 

saxplaya

Junior Member
used back to mint: my responsibility?

The display was not breaking when we sold him the computer. There was a crack in the hinge (cosmetic damage) which he tested when he looked at the comp before he bought it. I have used the comp for over a year with the crack there; the display was never breaking, so I am very hesitant to take back a computer that he may have damaged during the time he had it. That's like buying a pair of old boots at a goodwill and then suing for the price it costs to have them re-soled because it turned out to be more than you first thought. The cost it takes to put a used item back to mint condition really isn't a concern of mine I feel like, you know?
 

justalayman

Senior Member
a crack in a hinge is not cosmetic damage. It is damage to a part that affects the functionality of the unit. Cosmetic damage is damage that affects only aesthetics. If the hinge were to break completely, the computer becomes, more or less, not able to be used in the manner it was designed.



That being said; if he was aware of the cracked hinge upon his inspection, he still accepted the unit as it was and has no claim. Even if he did not notice the crack, he is still in a tough spot since he was allowed to inspect the computer prior to purchase. Unless you made an attempt to disguise the damage, it's on him for missing it.
 

saxplaya

Junior Member
I see what you mean about cosmetic vs. functional, however, I have been using the computer just fine with the crack for over a year. It makes the screen flop a bit unless you put it in the right position sometimes, but that has never been a problem for me. He also moved the screen back and forth several times when we met to see if that would be a problem, and then decided it was fine. I think he was just banking on driving down the price due to the crack and then fixing it for cheap--and he was shocked when he found out how much it would cost to repair it. But a seller of a used good isn't responsible for the price of returning it to mint condition so I feel like he's just scamming us. If not for the crack, the comp (2010 pro running mountain lion and with full microsoft office suite) would have sold for $650-750, not $550.

I feel like this is similar to someone buying an iphone that they see has a crack in the screen, and then when they go to the store and see how much apple will charge to repair the screen, they decide to return it (or worse--they return it now that a piece of glass has fallen out). What you see is what you get on craigslist imo..

If it's worked for a year with the crack and now all of a sudden the "display is breaking" how do I know that he hasn't broken it himself? That's really suspicious to me and makes me very hesitant. Either way, craigslist buyers are not entitled to returns.
 

BL

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

My boyfriend sold my macbook pro (running mountain lion and with the full microsoft office suite, original price ~$1300) on craigslist a few days ago for $550. He included in the ad that there was minor cosmetic damage, and even sent the potential buyer pictures of the damage. The buyer said that it looked fine, met with us in person, tested the computer (including the hinge, which had a crack), and bought it.

Now, he is claiming that he went to the apple store and found that it will cost $375 to fix the broken hinge. His email was as follows:

Hey Brad, I'm at the apple store because the screen hinge needed to be tightened, but it's not the screws. The display is breaking and needs to be replaced which is $375. I'd like my $ back. I will return the computer at your convenience. Please contact me ASAP.


He was fully aware of the damage when he bought the computer--especially something so prominent as the hinge crack. He moved the screen back and forth to test this and seemed satisfied (he bought it anyway). He is threatening to take us to small claims court because we refuse to issue a refund. The computer was sold as-is and was fully functional even with the hinge issue. I would like to know: does he have any case at all in small claims court? Any advice would be very much appreciated.
He was fully aware the screen hinge was cracked and the hinge/screen also was floppy .

He had an opportunity to inspect the item and was satisfied.

He assumed the hinge could simply be tightened .

It's on him.

The statement that the display is breaking is a vague statement.

There is the casing and display screen.

The screw holes could be worn and show signs of minor cracking that you may not have had any idea of,and this buyer isn't happy with it.Buyer remorse.

As was said ,tell the buyer to enjoy his working computer ,and to not contact you further.

As a side note: The software included has no bearing.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
ya mean this part:

§ 2-606. What Constitutes Acceptance of Goods.

(1) Acceptance of goods occurs when the buyer

(a) after a reasonable opportunity to inspect the goods signifies to the seller that the goods are conforming or that he will take or retain them in spite of their non-conformity; or

(b) fails to make an effective rejection (subsection (1) of Section 2-602), but such acceptance does not occur until the buyer has had a reasonable opportunity to inspect them; or
.
 

BL

Senior Member
ya mean this part:



.
And we're not talking about commercial,dealer,or any other entity where implied warranty is a given.

We're talking about a private used item sale that was advertized.

Even though the hinge crack was not cosmetic ,the buyer seen it ,inspected it,knew the lid was floppy,bought it and took it home.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
And we're not talking about commercial,dealer,or any other entity where implied warranty is a given.

We're talking about a private used item sale that was advertized.

Even though the hinge crack was not cosmetic ,the buyer seen it ,inspected it,knew the lid was floppy,bought it and took it home.
that was my point BL.

and it has nothing to do with an implied warranty or anything else. The section tranquility cited refers specifically to acceptance of merchandise for sale.
 

tranquility

Senior Member
The part tranquility referenced has to do with "goods" for sale and has nothing to do with being a "merchant". (As I assume is meant by how the portion may not apply.)

It has nothing to do with commercial, dealer or implied warranty.
 

BL

Senior Member
Hey APPLE fanboys

Doesn't the buyer need to get more than one estimate for the repair...
Barring being an Apple Fanboy :), Not really.

While more that one estimate is good to have , one from a legitimate source would suffice.

That being said , I stand by my responses.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top