Was I Wronged?

[JCooperfan1911]

I recently purchased a Yugoslavian produced SKS rifle from one of the large gun auction sites. The seller had a crate of them and showed one rifle in absolutely perfect condition. 0 blemishes anywhere on it. The condition was listed as “LNIB” and the specimen he chose to post photos of (the other rifles were just shown inside the crate with no details) truly looked brand new. Here is a photo from the auction:





Well my advertised “like new unissued” rifle arrived today and this is what the side looked like:



I wrote the seller saying my rifle had damage and he wrote me back saying it was a surplus rifle and was probably from the other rifles in the crate damaging it. This was my response:

Thanks for the fast response. It just would have been nice to know these marks were present as the rifle in the pictures has no marks like it whatsoever and that is why I decided to pay the premium for one of your rifles.

There was nothing in the auction to suggest these marks and to show only a spotless rifle while expecting customers to understand their rifles are going to be damaged from packing/shipping is a bit disingenuous.

What would you all do in this situation? Thank you for your thoughts.

 

[Ignition Override]

How good was his feedback, and how many items had he sold Before you bought the rifle?

 

[JCooperfan1911]

How good was his feedback, and how many items had he sold Before you bought the rifle?

He had a good feedback report, an A+, with about 500 prior sales over several years.

 

[entropy]

Back in the day I had the shop order me a Yugo from J&G Sales, and one for the sales rack, and both looked like the one in the top pic you posted. I got lucky. They are surplus rifles, so there is always going to be the possibility of getting one like yours when you don't contract for a specific gun. Enjoy it! Mine didn't stay like that for long; it was fired and used often, even was my truck gun for a while.

 

[MEHavey]

For a surplus battle rifle -- even if never issued -- it looks just fine.

 

[Gus Chiggins]

If that's LNIB, the seller has misrepresented it. I would demand a refund and return it.

 

[mjsdwash]

looks like a little gouging... I would probably just keep it and use it, knowing I would do that to it anyway, but SKS aren't $200 anymore, so how much you paid will be a big deal here. If you paid over $600, I may complain, over $750, I would throw a tantrum. Under $600 I would be happy, assuming it works.

 

[JohnKSa]

If he actually described the rifle as LNIB, then I would expect it to fit that description. For what it's worth, if I were a seller, I would never be willing to describe a batch of surplus rifles as LNIB, and if I were a buyer, I would be pretty skeptical of a seller who made such a claim.

 

[JCooperfan1911]

He described the rifles as “LNIB” and listed as “New Old Stock” and said in the description they were “pristine unissued unhandled”.

It is this deceptive language that I find misleading. The pictured rifle is gorgeous with no blemishes. The wording of the ad didn’t make a single mention the rifles would arrive with chunks of wood missing and black stains all over. There is a big dent on the opposite side where the wood meets the receiver cover as well.

I have asked the seller for a refund and we’ll see what happens.

 

[Steve S.]

You were lead to believe that the rifle you would receive would look like the pristine example in the photo, why would you think otherwise? The normal, average buyer would look at the photo and naturally think that my rifle will look like that also - why wouldn’t they? In turn, why would a person look at the advertised photo and conclude that the rifle that they would receive would be in a lesser condition - who does that? I think that you were lead to a belief with a photo and that you did not ask enough questions. The seller knew exactly what their advertised photo inferred and you were trusting. “LNIB” means an item is “like new” meaning exactly that, it has an appearance of being new - it either looks new or it has blemishes - we do not associate the word “new” with really meaning having blemishes - who does that? As with most things in life, the most valuable information is always that which you are not told - you have to ask questions, lots of questions - “trust but verify” will never do you wrong.

 

[Pat Riot]

“LNIB” means just that, not Little Nicks, Inclusions and Blemishes.

I would tell the seller to replace it with a like gun in the photo, replace the stock or refund my money that will also come with a review that takes some polish off that “A+“ review.

 

[DustyGmt]

I would not be happy, you were definitely mislead. The rifle's function is pretty irrelevant, I would insist on a stock swap or refund. I, like you, may have looked at the picture, description and profile rating and not asked a million questions and trusted. I probably would have asked if the rifle I would get would be just like the one in the picture but based on the listing, you were.

 

[doubleh]

You got the shaft, plain and simple. I would want a full refund or a big chunk of my money back to keep it.

 

[entropy]

He described the rifles as “LNIB” and listed as “New Old Stock” and said in the description they were “pristine unissued unhandled”.

It is this deceptive language that I find misleading. The pictured rifle is gorgeous with no blemishes. The wording of the ad didn’t make a single mention the rifles would arrive with chunks of wood missing and black stains all over. There is a big dent on the opposite side where the wood meets the receiver cover as well.

I have asked the seller for a refund and we’ll see what happens.

Actually, some of the Yugos were unissued, but if one were so naive as to believe they, as military rifles, were 'unhandled'.....Mine was sold with the record book of when it was handled; taken out and test fired at various intervals. It's good honest 'rack' wear.

I suspect what will happen is he'll tell you something similar, you'll lodge a complaint with the site, give him bad feed back, and both of your lives will go on. He will not be admonished, and you will have an SKS with some rack wear.

 

[WestKentucky]

If your happy with the gun aside from the dark spots then I would probably just move on. I would be frustrated but at the end of the day it’s not a 4 or 5 figure rifle, and it’s not worth the stress and aggravation of it.

I am assuming that you completed transfer through your FFL before posting here? If I were unhappy I would refuse to complete the transaction through the FFL and have them send it back after I demanded a refund based upon an inaccurate description.

 

[wiscoaster]

"LNIB" and "New Old Stock" are officially-recognized condition ratings and are ratings not applicable to a surplus rifle, regardless of whether they were issued to the troops or not and therefore yes, you were wronged by a false item description. However, depending on the price you paid and the actual condition of the rifle, you might want to just take WestKentucky's advice. Having bought a bunch of milsurps, yours looks to be in pretty decent shape for something that came out of a surplus rifles crate. If you want to file a complaint with the auction site or post a bad rating based on the inaccurate description, I think those moves would be appropriate to your purchase.

 

[rbernie]

It is customary for reputable sellers to disclose the use of 'stock' photos in an online auction, or to conversely to indicate that the item in the photo is the piece being sold. Was there no verbiage in the auction text in that regard?

 

[welldoya]

LNIB means just that - like new. There’s no room for interpretation.
I would ask for a rifle that meets that description.

 

[daniel craig]

Wronged? Eh probably. Worth doing anything about other than leave a review? That would depend on how much you paid in my opinion.

 

[HB]

What does Like New In Box mean for a military rifle? It was never in a box and it was new 50+ years ago.

I think for “unissued” it looks fine. I would clean up the cosmoline and call it good.

 

[wickedsprint]

Definitely misrepresented but if action is otherwise “LNIB” I would leave bad feedback and not care...just as the intended soldier would.

 

[MartinS]

It is not LNIB. The man lied to you, do what you can for redress.

 

[1KPerDay]

Looks to me like the stock is stained a little from oil. I don't see any dings or cracks or damage.

 

[SunnySlopes]

I recently bought a $135 All Clad saucepan from a national seller on fleabay based on the fact that the picture matched the set I currently own. He shipped me an All Clad, but entirely different series. I demanded a refund plus he pay shipping. He complied.

If I bought a rifle based upon that picture, and got what the OP got, I'd be perturbed. I'd want the seller to refund the money and pay shipping. If I decided to keep the rifle, I'd sure leave him unfavorable feedback.

 

[Bill M.]

Buying guns unseen online is a tough proposition any way you look at it. I do not know if you were "wronged" or not or if it makes any real difference. The seller could have posted a couple of pictures of each actual gun for sale instead of the one picture of a great looking one that probably was never in that shipment anyway. I guess I am old and jaded but I never would have expected to get one that looked like the generic picture shown. I think the difference in the actual gun and the picture was both deliberate and calculated on the part of the seller. What I do know is that if you have a chance to refuse the gun you just have to decide for yourself. If you do not have that chance then just chalk it up to experience. I think if the gun was shipped to a FFL and you have not done the transfer yet you can refuse it. But if you have done the transfer it is yours. I have sold a couple of guns on the internet but I have not bought one that way yet. I know on the ones I sold the deal was subject to customer approval at the FFL I shipped them to. I think I would have been out of the shipping cost to the FFL but would have insisted on the potential customer to pay to ship it back. On a deal like this I think both should take some ownership of a failed transaction. All the information was available to you up front. Maybe the next time insist that the seller send you photos of the actual gun you will be getting.