Topic: Butterfly Labs Forced &quot;On Hold For Refund&quot; for all my Single SC orders - page 18. (Read 59168 times)

Quote from: k9quaint on May 26, 2013, 12:58:38 PM

"wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates" they did not "fail to deliver" or "wrongfully repudiate"
He was aware that the delivery date was not set in stone. . . .and he received his refund (so was not repudiated). so this section would be difficult to apply in my mind. Again not a lawyer, but I fail to see where this applicable.

so now take a look at this (as I previously posted):

400.2A-505. (1) On cancellation of the lease contract, all obligations that are still executory on both sides are discharged, but any right based on prior default or performance survives, and the cancelling party also retains any remedy for default of the whole lease contract or any unperformed balance.

These refers to lease, not to contract of sale.

See the definitions here:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/40002A0103.HTM

You should check the laws on unwinding forward/futures contracts.

Show me a contract. Oh . .wait .. there isn't one.

When you post twice, I post twice. Enjoy! Grin

Hello Mr Obvious Sockpuppet is Obvious. Next time you try to astro-turf you should remember to stay calm. When you get angry you make mistakes.
Now that BFL can't cancel orders without destroying themselves, what is their plan for silencing criticism?

Oh, and ROFL at your "lease section" of the UCC. Master of business you must be!

int03h

full member

Activity: 532

Merit: 104

"wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates" they did not "fail to deliver" or "wrongfully repudiate"
He was aware that the delivery date was not set in stone. . . .and he received his refund (so was not repudiated). so this section would be difficult to apply in my mind. Again not a lawyer, but I fail to see where this applicable.

so now take a look at this (as I previously posted):

400.2A-505. (1) On cancellation of the lease contract, all obligations that are still executory on both sides are discharged, but any right based on prior default or performance survives, and the cancelling party also retains any remedy for default of the whole lease contract or any unperformed balance.

These refers to lease, not to contract of sale.

See the definitions here:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/40002A0103.HTM

You should check the laws on unwinding forward/futures contracts.

Show me a contract. Oh . .wait .. there isn't one.

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Endlessa on May 26, 2013, 12:46:47 PM

"wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates" they did not "fail to deliver" or "wrongfully repudiate"
He was aware that the delivery date was not set in stone. . . .and he received his refund (so was not repudiated). so this section would be difficult to apply in my mind. Again not a lawyer, but I fail to see where this applicable.

so now take a look at this (as I previously posted):

400.2A-505. (1) On cancellation of the lease contract, all obligations that are still executory on both sides are discharged, but any right based on prior default or performance survives, and the cancelling party also retains any remedy for default of the whole lease contract or any unperformed balance.

These refers to lease, not to contract of sale.

See the definitions here:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/40002A0103.HTM

You should check the laws on unwinding forward/futures contracts.

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

Quote from: k9quaint on May 26, 2013, 12:41:53 PM

Quote from: k9quaint on May 26, 2013, 12:41:53 PM

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious.

Some quality argumentative skills being displayed right there.

Not my fault he used the int30h account and then got confused about which one he was logged in as. He didn't even last a day.

I am here. Waiting for the terms of the bet .

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

I have an account and I am sticking to it.. I am still waiting for the terms of your bet...

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

Are you going to keep repeating the same thing over and over ? Thats hilarious.

When you post as Endlessa, I change one word to int30h. When you post as int30h, I change it to Endlessa. You can drop the pretense.
Also thank you for bringing the UCC to our attention, we never would have tumbled to the forward contract provisions had it not been for your aggressive redirecting. So BFL will get a two pronged attack, one for fraudulent business practices and one for unilaterally cancelling a forward contract that they did not want to pay off.

And how can we forget:
Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

Ya ok, it's crazy that two people can observe your constantly changing point and the circle jerk you continually exhibit. You should apply for a nobel, as your skills in deduction are not even rivaled by Sherlock Holmes. I can pay a lawyer to do anything, doesn't mean he will win and it certainly won't stop the lawyer from taking my money. Ok, since your just exercising your FUD creation skills, I don't think there is any form of point or substance in your conversation. I did actually enjoy our conversation on UCC, but now your just being boring and childish.

Hello Mr Obvious Sockpuppet is Obvious. Next time you try to astro-turf you should remember to stay calm. When you get angry you make mistakes.
Now that BFL can't cancel orders without destroying themselves, what is their plan for silencing criticism?

Oh, and ROFL at your "lease section" of the UCC. Master of business you must be!

int03h

full member

Activity: 532

Merit: 104

Quote from: Endlessa on May 26, 2013, 12:49:37 PM

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious.

Some quality argumentative skills being displayed right there.

Not my fault he used the int30h account and then got confused about which one he was logged in as. He didn't even last a day.

I am here. Waiting for the terms of the bet .

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

I have an account and I am sticking to it.. I am still waiting for the terms of your bet...

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

Are you going to keep repeating the same thing over and over ? Thats hilarious.

When you post as Endlessa, I change one word to int30h. When you post as int30h, I change it to Endlessa. You can drop the pretense.
Also thank you for bringing the UCC to our attention, we never would have tumbled to the forward contract provisions had it not been for your aggressive redirecting. So BFL will get a two pronged attack, one for fraudulent business practices and one for unilaterally cancelling a forward contract that they did not want to pay off.

And how can we forget:
Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

And you can drop the pretense that you have a brain. We are not the same person.

drlukacs

sr. member

Activity: 854

Merit: 253

l0tt0.com

awesome thanks. . .I was in a different view at the time. . it only showed the pieces. . .thanks for the context

can you show where it says they are not explicitly allowed to cancel the agreement?
I see where they can't "wrongfully" do it. . .but still haven't seen where it says they can't do it

I'll be looking through that version you linked.. it's much easier to read

I am glad that we are making some progress on this threat. I will get back with some authorities on this point. (In the meanwhile, I would ask everyone on the threat to refrain from ad hominem attacks, as they do not assist us in our discussion.)

Endlessa

sr. member

Activity: 335

Merit: 250

Quote from: k9quaint on May 26, 2013, 12:41:53 PM

"wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates" they did not "fail to deliver" or "wrongfully repudiate"
He was aware that the delivery date was not set in stone. . . .and he received his refund (so was not repudiated). so this section would be difficult to apply in my mind. Again not a lawyer, but I fail to see where this applicable.

so now take a look at this (as I previously posted):

400.2A-505. (1) On cancellation of the lease contract, all obligations that are still executory on both sides are discharged, but any right based on prior default or performance survives, and the cancelling party also retains any remedy for default of the whole lease contract or any unperformed balance.

These refers to lease, not to contract of sale.

See the definitions here:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/40002A0103.HTM

awesome thanks. . .I was in a different view at the time. . it only showed the pieces. . .thanks for the context

can you show where it says they are not explicitly allowed to cancel the agreement?
I see where they can't "wrongfully" do it. . .but still haven't seen where it says they can't do it

I'll be looking through that version you linked.. it's much easier to read

Endlessa

sr. member

Activity: 335

Merit: 250

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious.

Some quality argumentative skills being displayed right there.

Not my fault he used the int30h account and then got confused about which one he was logged in as. He didn't even last a day.

I am here. Waiting for the terms of the bet .

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

I have an account and I am sticking to it.. I am still waiting for the terms of your bet...

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

Are you going to keep repeating the same thing over and over ? Thats hilarious.

When you post as Endlessa, I change one word to int30h. When you post as int30h, I change it to Endlessa. You can drop the pretense.
Also thank you for bringing the UCC to our attention, we never would have tumbled to the forward contract provisions had it not been for your aggressive redirecting. So BFL will get a two pronged attack, one for fraudulent business practices and one for unilaterally cancelling a forward contract that they did not want to pay off.

And how can we forget:
Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

Ya ok, it's crazy that two people can observe your constantly changing point and the circle jerk you continually exhibit. You should apply for a nobel, as your skills in deduction are not even rivaled by Sherlock Holmes. I can pay a lawyer to do anything, doesn't mean he will win and it certainly won't stop the lawyer from taking my money. Ok, since your just exercising your FUD creation skills, I don't think there is any form of point or substance in your conversation. I did actually enjoy our conversation on UCC, but now your just being boring and childish.

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

"wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates" they did not "fail to deliver" or "wrongfully repudiate"
He was aware that the delivery date was not set in stone. . . .and he received his refund (so was not repudiated). so this section would be difficult to apply in my mind. Again not a lawyer, but I fail to see where this applicable.

so now take a look at this (as I previously posted):

400.2A-505. (1) On cancellation of the lease contract, all obligations that are still executory on both sides are discharged, but any right based on prior default or performance survives, and the cancelling party also retains any remedy for default of the whole lease contract or any unperformed balance.

These refers to lease, not to contract of sale.

See the definitions here:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/40002A0103.HTM

Yep. I tried to tell him that was not the relevant statute. But he blew his stack before anything could come of it.

drlukacs

sr. member

Activity: 854

Merit: 253

l0tt0.com

Quote from: drlukacs on May 26, 2013, 12:39:52 PM

"wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates" they did not "fail to deliver" or "wrongfully repudiate"
He was aware that the delivery date was not set in stone. . . .and he received his refund (so was not repudiated). so this section would be difficult to apply in my mind. Again not a lawyer, but I fail to see where this applicable.

so now take a look at this (as I previously posted):

400.2A-505. (1) On cancellation of the lease contract, all obligations that are still executory on both sides are discharged, but any right based on prior default or performance survives, and the cancelling party also retains any remedy for default of the whole lease contract or any unperformed balance.

These refers to lease, not to contract of sale.

See the definitions here:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/40002A0103.HTM

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

Here are also the Missouri UCC provisions:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c400.htm

You may wish to look up the following:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/4000020713.HTM

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/4000020715.HTM

I could find nothing here stating that a seller can be off the hook by a simple refund. Can you?

§ 2-105. Definitions: Transferability; "Future" Goods; "Lot"; "Commercial Unit".

(1) Goods must be both existing and identified before any interest in them may pass. Goods that are not both existing and identified are "future" goods. A purported present sale of future goods or of any interest therein operates as a contract to sell.

One party cannot simply cancel a forward contract because they don't want to pay anymore.

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

Quote from: drlukacs on May 26, 2013, 12:39:52 PM

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious.

Some quality argumentative skills being displayed right there.

Not my fault he used the int30h account and then got confused about which one he was logged in as. He didn't even last a day.

I am here. Waiting for the terms of the bet .

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

I have an account and I am sticking to it.. I am still waiting for the terms of your bet...

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

Are you going to keep repeating the same thing over and over ? Thats hilarious.

When you post as Endlessa, I change one word to int30h. When you post as int30h, I change it to Endlessa. You can drop the pretense.
Also thank you for bringing the UCC to our attention, we never would have tumbled to the forward contract provisions had it not been for your aggressive redirecting. So BFL will get a two pronged attack, one for fraudulent business practices and one for unilaterally cancelling a forward contract that they did not want to pay off.

And how can we forget:
Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

Endlessa

sr. member

Activity: 335

Merit: 250

Here are also the Missouri UCC provisions:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c400.htm

You may wish to look up the following:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/4000020713.HTM

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/4000020715.HTM

I could find nothing here stating that a seller can be off the hook by a simple refund. Can you?

Yes I just linked it and previously linked it. . . and I have read that entire code

drlukacs

sr. member

Activity: 854

Merit: 253

l0tt0.com

Here are also the Missouri UCC provisions:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c400.htm

You may wish to look up the following:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/4000020713.HTM

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/4000020715.HTM

I could find nothing here stating that a seller can be off the hook by a simple refund. Can you?

Endlessa

sr. member

Activity: 335

Merit: 250

Quote from: drlukacs on May 26, 2013, 12:31:38 PM

Now on the point of rights of buyers under UCC:

Quote

§ 2-712. "Cover"; Buyer's Procurement of Substitute Goods.

(1) If the seller wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates or the buyer rightfully rejects or justifiably revokes acceptance, the buyer may "cover" by making in good faith and without unreasonable delay any reasonable purchase of or contract to purchase goods in substitution for those due from the seller.

(2) The buyer may recover from the seller as damages the difference between the cost of cover and the contract price together with any incidental or consequential damages as hereinafter defined (Section 2-715), but less expenses saved in consequence of the seller's breach.

(3) Failure of the buyer to effect cover within this section does not bar him from any other remedy.

§ 2-713. Buyer's Damages for Non-delivery or Repudiation.

(1) Subject to Section 2-723, if the seller wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates or the buyer rightfully rejects or justifiably revokes acceptance:

(a) the measure of damages in the case of wrongful failure to deliver by the seller or rightful rejection or justifiable revocation of acceptance by the buyer is the difference between the market price at the time for tender under the contract and the contract price together with any incidental or consequential damages under Section 2-715, but less expenses saved in consequence of the seller's breach; and

(b) the measure of damages for repudiation by the seller is the difference between the market price at the expiration of a commercially reasonable time after the buyer learned of the repudiation, but no later than the time stated in paragraph (a), and the contract price together with any incidental or consequential damages provided in this Article (Section 2--715), less expenses saved in consequence of the seller's breach.

(2) Market price is to be determined as of the place for tender or, in cases of rejection after arrival or revocation of acceptance, as of the place of arrival.

"wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates" they did not "fail to deliver" or "wrongfully repudiate"
He was aware that the delivery date was not set in stone. . . .and he received his refund (so was not repudiated). so this section would be difficult to apply in my mind. Again not a lawyer, but I fail to see where this applicable.

so now take a look at this (as I previously posted):

400.2A-505. (1) On cancellation of the lease contract, all obligations that are still executory on both sides are discharged, but any right based on prior default or performance survives, and the cancelling party also retains any remedy for default of the whole lease contract or any unperformed balance.

(2) On termination of the lease contract, all obligations that are still executory on both sides are discharged but any right based on prior default or performance survives.

(3) Unless the contrary intention clearly appears, expressions of "cancellation", "rescission", or the like of the lease contract may not be construed as a renunciation or discharge of any claim in damages for an antecedent default.

(4) Rights and remedies for material misrepresentation or fraud include all rights and remedies available under this Article for default.

(5) Neither rescission nor a claim for rescission of the lease contract nor rejection or return of the goods may bar or be deemed inconsistent with a claim for damages or other right or remedy.

int03h

full member

Activity: 532

Merit: 104

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious.

Some quality argumentative skills being displayed right there.

Not my fault he used the int30h account and then got confused about which one he was logged in as. He didn't even last a day.

I am here. Waiting for the terms of the bet .

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

I have an account and I am sticking to it.. I am still waiting for the terms of your bet...

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

Are you going to keep repeating the same thing over and over ? Thats hilarious.

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious.

Some quality argumentative skills being displayed right there.

Not my fault he used the int30h account and then got confused about which one he was logged in as. He didn't even last a day.

I am here. Waiting for the terms of the bet .

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

I have an account and I am sticking to it.. I am still waiting for the terms of your bet...

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

int03h

full member

Activity: 532

Merit: 104

Quote from: Endlessa on May 26, 2013, 12:31:42 PM

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious.

Some quality argumentative skills being displayed right there.

Not my fault he used the int30h account and then got confused about which one he was logged in as. He didn't even last a day.

I am here. Waiting for the terms of the bet .

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it.

I have an account and I am sticking to it.. I am still waiting for the terms of your bet...

And since you insist on remove the quoted text that specifies your accusations and is determined to make a point : Quote from: int03h on Today at 05:07:00 PM

Quote

Quote from: k9quaint on May 25, 2013, 10:10:32 PM
Go put a bet on a bitcoin betting site. I don't do anything without escrow that involves people who only have posts dated from today. Cheesy
Of course I don't make sense to you. Nothing I type will ever make sense to you.

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Endlessa on May 26, 2013, 12:17:00 PM

Quote from: k9quaint on May 26, 2013, 12:14:24 PM

Quote from: Endlessa on May 26, 2013, 12:12:38 PM

Quote from: k9quaint on May 26, 2013, 12:04:45 PM

Quote from: Endlessa on May 26, 2013, 11:58:34 AM

Quote from: k9quaint on May 26, 2013, 11:34:28 AM

Quote from: drlukacs on May 26, 2013, 11:15:17 AM

Quote from: k9quaint on May 26, 2013, 10:45:03 AM

[You can file in your local jurisdiction since Butterfly Labs sells online. Ask for damages of the difference between the market value of your forward contract to purchase BFL equipment and the amount you were refunded. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally terminated.

There is more to be claimed, actually, because were not talking about an item whose price simply increased over time, but rather means of production -- a tool that can generate revenue. It more akin to failing to deliver a car to a taxi cab licensee. It prevents the buyer from earning.

You are correct, loss of revenue is certainly to be considered. He would need to consult a lawyer about it though.

Holy crap k9quaint, I'll already went over the facts in UCC for missouri with you. I think you have a bad case of fish memory. drlukacs please go back and read before you run in all cowboy shooting your guns in the air yelling "Yeehaw! look at me I'm making points and stuff!"

In the state of Missouri, once you cancel the implied contract and refund the money. All responsibilities of both parties are terminated. The only recourse after that is to PROVE prior breach of contract (before the cancellation). Since the product wasn't delivered yet. The only possible thing he could bring up is the delivery time. With the link I previously gave showing the archived version of the website, It clearly stated that October was the "Currently scheduled" date. This clearly makes the buyer aware that the date is not definitive, unless they lack basic reading comprehension. The final obligation for the seller is to let them know if/when the specification of the product changes, which they did through the forums and with the confirmation of the buyers desire to continue the purchase (the recent dialog that pops up). Now, you can be frustrated and angry and I can understand your emotions. You can't arbitrarily say they did something illegal. I have seen no supporting evidence of your claims. I only see that you are angry and want to hurt them. I'm supportive of expressing your feelings and emotions. I'm not supportive of some distorted, trumped up, vengeful misinformation campaign. I'm supportive of exploring consumer rights, as this is something all buyers should be aware of when purchasing products. I'm not supportive of making crap up because you "feel" like that's what the law should be.

* this is not legal advice and should not be taken as such. If you feel you have an actual fact that disproves this is the law, by all means I'd love to explore it.

Hello again Mr. Obvious Sockpuppet is Obvious.

BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. BFL can be sued by Xian for the difference between the current value of that contract and the money they refunded to him.
Xian should win effortlessly.

UCC covers the sale of "future goods" (commonly referred to as pre-orders) as well. your just making things up again. ..bring some supporting law to the table and I'll take a look. If your right, the factual contribution is much appreciated

As for your "sock puppet" claim. Firstly, your getting really boring with that. When people speak this way, I start to think of them as the type of person who would appear in a tinfoil hat tell me how microwaves are "mind control" devices. Secondly, my demeanor and approach to discussing this with you is vastly different from Josh's approach (right or wrong, couldn't care less). I feel a touch sad that I need to inform you that there are other people in the world that don't believe in your beliefs. And all of them but the actual "Josh" are not named Josh.

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. BFL can be sued by Xian for the difference between the current value of that contract and the money they refunded to him.
Xian should win effortlessly.

Again bring a law to the table and lets take a look at it. . . keep claiming sock puppet, Its arbitrary and pointless. Only serves the purpose of misdirection on your part. If you want to imagine me being Josh, feel free. It doesn't change the discussion at all.

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not int30h if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore.

I will put no effort into proving my identity to you. I do not owe you that. I could care less.

Also, I'm not the one who claimed "Implied Contract" and consumer protections in Missouri, you were. I only brought the actual facts and direct law of consumer protections (UCC) to the table, so we could talk about them and how they may or may not apply to what you were talking about. When that didn't pan out for you, you come back with new equally sure argument about "future contracts". I was hoping you would, in turn, do the leg work to show precisely the laws you are talking about. Instead, because I'm almost sure your not going to, I will once again figure out for you what you are talking about, so the community can evaluate the facts and educate our selves on what is and isn't protecting us when we purchase product. To clarify, I'm not fully claiming you are wrong on this. I'm just asking you bring it to the table with some facts, so we discern whether or not this is another statement of how you feel the law should be or if it's an actually applicable argument.

In addition, anybody can register a complaint with AG against anybody within their jurisdiction. This is no way a proof of wrong doing.

Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not int30h if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it so I don't have to answer you twice.

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000