Craigslist Return Rights

My question involves a consumer law issue in the State of: Texas

Hello, Thank you for any advice in advance
I just bought a 60" Sony DLP TV off craigslist. The buyer mentions in his add that the TV " Works Great" and a new bulb was replaced last month. I took a photo of the add before buying, so I do have a copy off it. The add also lists the sellers phone number. I contacted the seller through text message and I asked "Is there anything wrong with it? Any problems that you know of?" The seller responded " Works great! New lamp less than a month ago" I went to view the tv at the sellers house, he had a soccer game on. The TV looked great, I changed the channel to another soccer game, then a football game. I asked the seller in person, not through text, " is anything wrong with it? Does it overheat? Does it turn off ? etc" I was assured everything was fine, they just wanted a Flat screen to hang on his wall. I purchased the TV, took it home an plugged it in. Immediatly I noticed with my direct tv menu the color was off. It was green and yellow instead of the normal blue. After messing with settings, I searched the internet and found out that it was most likely a bad Optical block. a $1200 repair. On green backgrounds such as grass etc, it looks fine, however normal shows leave a green or yellow tint everywhere. I was displeased. On day 2 i contacted the seller and told him my issue. I offered to return the TV in the orginal condition as sold to him, reinstall it in his living room, and deduct a $25 fee (restocking fee) for his time from my refund. I was told to contact him tomorrow. I came home today, turned the TV on and within 5 mins, the TV shut off. It now will no longer turn on either after less than 4 hours of use and 2 days. I am curious to what my chances are at possibly winning a judgment in small claims court vs the seller? On my side, i have text messages stating the TV "Works great!" etc. On his side, his add reads

" Purchased 5 years ago for over $4,500
Replaced lamp last week. New lamp works great!
Upgrading to a mountable TV. No longer need this one.
Text or call with questions
xxx-xxx-xxxx
No emails please
All sales final
Must arrange own pickup"

The all sales final part, concerns me. The fact the TV was broken when sold with a $1200 part, then completely stops working on day 2, feels like his add was intentionally decietful. That the product was not sold as advertised. The owner knew the TV was bad, and the colors were off and failed to mention at any point this information. Instead offered the TV is a great TV, his mom loves it but wants something to hang on the wall. No problems at all. So do I stand ANY chance of winning or would I look like a fool taking this to small claims court in Texas. Thanks again.

How can you prove it was not damaged, being moved from his premises to yours?

He didn't actually *lie* to you in his text. He just didn't answer your specific question.

However, I think in small claims court, you'd have a pretty decent chance of prevailing.

so, it worked fine when you checked it out and apparently was damaged on the trip to your house. Sorry but you now have a TV that doesn't work and in my opinion, absolutely no chance of winning in court.

Quote:

---

Quoting mmmagique

---

He didn't actually *lie* to you in his text. He just didn't answer your specific question.

However, I think in small claims court, you'd have a pretty decent chance of prevailing.

---

Small claims is a wild wild west show ... anything can happen .. of course the guy might not pay

Jk, negative. The TV worked on the channels I was shown however not the rest. I was told the TV had no problems, a new lamp, and everything worked great. Once I arrive home the picture was defective on many channels. As I was filming a video of the issue with the TV on day 3, the picture shut off and the sound continued working. As I continued filming the screen then turned on then shut off again and the lamp light came on showing a defective lamp. The TV is unusable. When I attempted to get the seriel number I discovered the seriel number tag had been removed. When calling Sony about why it would be removed I was told it is often removed when warrenty work is completed. I have been extremely friendly and professional with this individual however he refuses to contact me. I have documented through pictures, videos, text messages the entire process. Do I stand any chance on this? I plan to file tomorrow afternoon if we can not come to a compromise. Thanks again.

negative to what? You saw the tv for yourself and was satisfied with it. Then, for some unknown reason it did not work properly after you put it in your car and took it for a ride. Prove otherwise if you expect to win. You want to argue the color was off. You checked it out. Was it? A judge isn't going to care that you watched only programs with lots of grass in the scene. I suspect if you get a smart ass judge, he will tell you to use it only for watching football, golf, and the national lawn mowing championships.

Oh, that's right. It doesn't work at all anymore. I wonder why that is? Do you know? If so, can you prove the seller knew it was about to die, a mere few hours after selling it to you?

Quote:

---

I was told the TV had no problems, a new lamp, and everything worked great

---

so, does it have a new lamp? If so, unless you can prove the seller had knowledge of some other issue, you lose.

Quote:

---

As I continued filming the screen then turned on then shut off again and the lamp light came on showing a defective lamp.

---

Ok, maybe the brand new lamp was defective from the factory. Maybe the travel in the vehicle damaged it. Maybe you set the television down a bit roughly and damaged it.

It will come down to what you can prove. So far you have not shown that you can prove anything.

Quote:

---

Do I stand any chance on this?

---

what can you prove?

Quote:

---

When calling Sony about why it would be removed I was told it is often removed when warrenty work is completed.

---

Um, so? It had warranty work done on it. So what?

and I do not believe you about removing the serial number. Not only is there no reason for it, it would be a problem if there was an additional warranty issue. Removing the serial number could easily get Sony sued because it could be seen as an attempt to avoid providing the warranty they provided when the TV was purchased.


Seriously, unless you can prove the seller actually hid something from you, you are not going to win. So far you have not given any reason the seller actually would have known there was a problem. I don't see you winning. The only thing I can see that might give you traction would be if the seller could not prove he replaced the lamp or you could prove it wasn't replaced. Can you prove that?

You bought an item as is, no guarantee or warranty of any sort; once you exchanged money for TV, you owned it and it became your problem with all of its problems.

The serial number tag... You could have checked out before you bought it. The green color issue, you had multiple channels to switch to and yet you opted for another soccer game and a football game. A defective bulb, it worked great and only became defective after it became yours!

Friendly and professional isn't the problem here... "As is" means "as is"... And filing tomorrow morning, or afternoon, you still have little to no recourse. The way I look at it, money I spend on craigslist is money I am sure I am ready to throw away, if not, then I don'y buy anything... Which is probably the reason why I can say i have never bought anything off of craigslist!

Have to agree with JK and Guy - what you saw worked perfectly. If you didn't insist on seeing more before buying something clearly advised was "as is" from the start, the court is going to put that burden on you. Of course the seller is going to say that whatever issues occurred were due to mishandling during shipping and setup on your end, and you don't stand a chance of winning without being able to PROVE, not just insinuate, otherwise.

JK, aardvarc and Guy all have good points. However, this tv was listed as "works great", so, the judge could go either way with his/her answer. Personally, I'd give it a shot, because I'd feel lied to and led on. Even if I lost, I'd feel as though I'd done everything I could.

If you do take it to court, please let us know how it turns out for you.