The Breitling Watch Source Forums

This is not discussed yet but actually worth investigate further

You raise a good point. However, that doesn't explain Alcede's claim that Justin is telling us a different story from the claim he provided to Alcede's credit card company. That suggests one of the parties isn't being forthright, unless someone in the mix is inadvertently getting the facts wrong. Also, if a postal worker was going to steal a watch, wouldn't it make more sense for him to just take it, rather than replace it with a fake? What are the odds that a postal worker who owns a fake Breitling got lucky enough to open a box containing a real Breitling? Given that it was an overnight package, moving with other overnight packages, it wasn't like the handlers had a lot of time to go pawing through each box. A handler would have had to be very lucky in blindly picking just the right one. Possible? Yes. Likely? I have my doubts. But I agree with you - it does warrant further exploration.

jjalcede: Welcome to the site.

I'm guessing that today may be your first visit to this site. Please take a look around and notice that the detection and notification of fake Breitling watches and their sellers is a significant part of this site. The members here take this sort of thing very seriously.

Several of the members here also buy and sell watches frequently, transacting hundreds of thousands of dollars with people they never meet. Honesty and trust are paramount. Disputes like the one at issue hit home with us all, and threaten our ability to continue to enjoy this expensive but meaningful hobby.

You have come in today suggesting civil suit and/or arrest. For whichever of you is in fact the perpetrator, such outcomes make perfect sense to us. Under either version of what happened, there are likely violations of state and possibly federal laws, not to mention civil liability. Such a judgment against the actual perpetrator would be welcomed by the members of this site.

As it turns out, the seller is known to other members here who have dealt with him and spoken with him on deals amounting to several thousand dollars. From what I have seen here, what you allege has not been the experience of those who have dealt with the seller. Again, I don't know him but I know one person here who I completely trust, for whom the seller has earned his complete trust. You have been met with questions and some level of mistrust because the seller has an established reputation of honesty and trustworthiness.

Each of you has posted on this site firmly claiming to be the victim. As one who wants, above all, the sanctity of the marketplace preserved and the integrity of this hobby and this site maintained, my only suggestion, and you may have already done it, is to go to law enforcement. ( I believe you are in law enforcement yourself) I believe that the seller posted that he has spoken with law enforcement. Good. If both sides submit this to the authorities, maybe they will gain sufficient information to investigate and get to the bottom of this. Better yet, and this goes for the seller too, please post the contact information of the investigating officer(s)--the seller claims he has had difficulty getting the authorities interested in this dispute. Maybe both sides reporting will get something done. Let everybody lay their cards on the table in the light of day.

Hey guys it actually is one more senario that both are saying the troth

In fact the postman ore someone handling the watch from seller to buyer can be the one changing the watch

Let say a employe on the carier have a fake breitling and found a box containing a real watch
In some time he open the box and change the watch and lett it go to the buyer

The buyer receive a fake watch and clams the seller

In this senario the postemployie is not suspected rather seller buyer is going to get the fight like this



This is not discussed yet but actually worth investigate further


Regards Jonas

It would be considered a fake if the buyer took a fake to his local AD. We have no way of verifying that the watch he took to his dealer is the watch he received from Justin. It would be an ideal scam for the buyer to have a fake in his possession, buy a real Breitling, receive said Breitling, take the fake to the dealer to have it verified as such, file a claim with PayPal, using the AD's verification of the fake as "proof," return the fake to the seller, and keep the real watch. I'm not saying this is what happened; I don't know what happened. But the above scenario is perfectly plausible. It is also plausible that a person could sell a fake watch, claiming it is real, although this approach lacks creativity.

However, looking beyond the basic scenarios, a few things stand out. One, Justin is an established member here, and has earned the trust of other trustworthy members. .

The seller has an impeccable record/reputation record here but for him to fight and win the credit card chargeback by the buyer with Paypal which most likely is "Not As Described" (a very strong dispute charge), he needs to provide the proof/supporting documentations that what he actually sold the buyer was an Authentic Breitling Watch and not a replica as what the buyer is claiming. That is why I was asking in my previous post how the item was sold on Ebay and if it came with any documentation to prove its authenticity.

The seller needs to go back to the AD where he purchased that the watch from and request for receipts or any other documentations proving the authenticity of the watch and send it to Paypal.

Another factor (in my opinion) that could also help the seller is his seller feedback and record on Ebay and Paypal in regards to selling high priced items.

Sounds like he already did that. OP indicated he won in ebay and pp dispute resolution which requires both sides to produce evidence and buyer has not disputed that occurred. That would include buyer's alleged letter from an alleged AD. BUYER LOST!!

What buyer then did was a unilateral charge back with his credit card company. That is tantamount to a sucker punch for an unrepentant sore loser. But pp has no choice and it creates another dispute resolution with pp. It just allows the buyer to deprive seller of the funds for a few more weeks. And as OP indicated, this has already gone on for months.

Unless I have dealt with someone in the past, I will never accept pp again. The scammers have realized filing a claim is one tool to be used in a scheme to defraud. Even when you win, you can be deprived of important funds for months. And then there is the emotional hassle. Jnelson has been down this road too. Not worth it.

If the watch originally came from a Breitling AD with all the documentations, how can it be considered a replica by the buyer's local AD???

That is why I was asking in my previous post how the item was sold on Ebay and if it came with any documentation to prove its authenticity.

The CC chargeback is a completely different separate dispute from the Ebay and Paypal dispute that decided in favor of the seller.

Based on my experience, before a credit card company files a chargeback with the merchant (and in this case its Paypal), the investigator analyst assigned to the case have already completed gathering all the facts relating to the transaction including verification of all the documents submitted by the buyer ( 2nd opinion letter on a company letterhead, Copy of the actual Ebay Listing describing the item that was purchased, emails that the buyer attempted to resolve the dispute with the seller and proof that the item has shipped back to the seller). From what I read on this thread, it seems the buyer have done of most these.

Again, this is clearly a Not As Described chargeback dispute as the buyer "claims" that the item received was not what was described on the listing by the seller as it was a allegedly a "replica watch". As mentioned in my previous post, this is a very strong type of credit card dispute that even Paypal indicates in their user agreement that they don't offer seller protection for "significantly not as described" items. The seller can fight the dispute and recover the funds by providing the supporting documents/papers proving the authenticity of the specific item sold to the complaining buyer.

You raise a good point. However, that doesn't explain Alcede's claim that Justin is telling us a different story from the claim he provided to Alcede's credit card company. That suggests one of the parties isn't being forthright, unless someone in the mix is inadvertently getting the facts wrong. Also, if a postal worker was going to steal a watch, wouldn't it make more sense for him to just take it, rather than replace it with a fake? What are the odds that a postal worker who owns a fake Breitling got lucky enough to open a box containing a real Breitling? Given that it was an overnight package, moving with other overnight packages, it wasn't like the handlers had a lot of time to go pawing through each box. A handler would have had to be very lucky in blindly picking just the right one. Possible? Yes. Likely? I have my doubts. But I agree with you - it does warrant further exploration.

If I dispute a charge from a department store, the retailer has an opportunity and incentive to submit some proof. THIS is precisely a big part of the problem I see with the pp process - it is rife with mutliple oppotunities for a dishonest person to screw the honest one or at least hold up the funds for months on end and drag it all out.

The problem is, documentation won't prove the authenticity of the watch he sent to the buyer. It would only prove Justin bought a genuine Breitling at some point from a dealer. I suppose any piece of information might help Justin's case, but it doesn't change my answer to your first question.