Jump to content

NewBee buying Bees however Im a little take back and unsure


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Philbee said:

I watched the beginning of the end of the building industry just before the leaky home disaster.
Builders went to new higher paying jobs so the Hammer hands became builders and the laborers became hammer hands .
It was a shambles of the highest order

yeah i was doing electrical type work back then.

anyone could call themselves a builder.

i saw one place where a "young builder" put on an addition. not one wall was straight, even used rough saw timber inside and painted over it fur and all.

turns out the "young builder" was a hammer hand or laborer that worked for local builder and was doing side projects. 

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You got taken for a ride. You were right in expecting 5 frames in each nuc. I have never heard of anyone selling nucs with virgin queens, that’s just really weird. 

the whole thing sounds weird. virgin queens IN a nuc ?? ???? really, he intends to use your bees ?? going into a partnership ???   plus the sellers record is not very good.

No. Not you @Alanbee.  The seller on trade me. Those nuc's are a rip off. as has been pointed out.

Posted Images

I was thinking you were maybe a one off Alan, but in view of what Werdna said, I think this guy has a problem. No matter how little a 2 year "helper" may know, he would have to know that a nuc with only one mostly drawn frame and 3 hardly drawn frames is a rip off. I now think the  guy has a basic honesty problem rather than just being ignorant, and has been creaming money by taking advantage of nuubs who know nothing.

 

Basic honesty and ethics won't change even if he learns more about bees, therefore better he is avoided. He's probably been generating good sales volumes by coming in with a cheaper price than anyone else, but a $300 nuc from someone else is actually likely to be a cheaper option.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Good Info 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alastair said:

I was thinking you were maybe a one off Alan, but in view of what Werdna said, I think this guy has a problem. No matter how little a 2 year "helper" may know, he would have to know that a nuc with only one mostly drawn frame and 3 hardly drawn frames is a rip off. I now think the  guy has a basic honesty problem rather than just being ignorant, and has been creaming money by taking advantage of nuubs who know nothing.

 

Basic honesty and ethics won't change even if he learns more about bees, therefore better he is avoided. He's probably been generating good sales volumes by coming in with a cheaper price than anyone else, but a $300 nuc from someone else is actually likely to be a cheaper option.

I have just had to take some affirmative action more to come on this .. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when do you have any right to demand the person be identified on a global public platform?

  • The complaint is still being processed and has not been resolved
  • The complaint does not involve you, nor me, nor the site. We are not a lynch mob.
  • We've been in a position to advise the OP that its not right and they've been able to approach the seller with a valid complaint as a result. That is what was asked of us, and that is our win point.
  • At the time of responding to you the seller was indicating they will refund, therefore coming to an appropriate resolution with the purchaser.
  • Its nothing to do with us, there is a complaint process on TM
  • The individual selling, does not necessarily have a right of reply here to balance the viewpoint or provide their side of the story
  • There is enough information here to do your own homework to work out who it is and therefore avoid dealing with them in the future, or if you really need to, you can ask via conversation.
  • If the complainant can be identified as an individual through the link ID (rather than a company), or worse gets named, then the person who posts that information WILL be in breach of the privacy act.

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Good Info 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Grant said:

Since when do you have any right to demand the person be identified on a global public platform?

  • The complaint is still being processed and has not been resolved
  • The complaint does not involve you, nor me, nor the site. We are not a lynch mob.
  • We've been in a position to advise the OP that its not right and they've been able to approach the seller with a valid complaint as a result. That is what was asked of us, and that is our win point.
  • At the time of responding to you the seller was indicating they will refund, therefore coming to an appropriate resolution with the purchaser.
  • Its nothing to do with us, there is a complaint process on TM
  • The individual selling, does not necessarily have a right of reply here to balance the viewpoint or provide their side of the story
  • There is enough information here to do your own homework to work out who it is and therefore avoid dealing with them in the future, or if you really need to, you can ask via conversation.
  • If the complainant can be identified as an individual through the link ID (rather than a company), or worse gets named, then the person who posts that information WILL be in breach of the privacy act.

 

awesome, makes sense, thanks for the response. Good to know there is no objection to asking for the specific details via private messaging on the forum.

 

didn't mean for it to sound like a demand rather than a request, but that's tone I guess

Edited by tommy dave
  • Good Info 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing that annoys me about this situation is that by definition, many or most nucs sold on TM go to brand new beekeepers. They know nothing and taking their money is like taking candy from a baby.

 

To sell such a person a nuc without even much drawn comb, presumably not a lot of bees, and an unmated queen, is akin to theft. The queen may not mate and if that happens the nuuby purchaser has no idea what to do. Even if it does mate, it could take an entire season for the nuc to build up to any kind of strength and the owner may harvest nothing the first year.

 

So in this case the dispute process is still playing out and nobody is "convicted" as it were. But question for you Grant. If a rogue of some sort, not necessarily this guy but a thief, or maybe some other kind of rip off artist is discovered in the industry, do you see this site as having any role in providing some means to warn people of the individual? I do know felons convicted in court have been id'ed, but some people like say a rip off artist on TM are never going to be taken to court.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, tristan said:

yeah i was doing electrical type work back then.

anyone could call themselves a builder.

i saw one place where a "young builder" put on an addition. not one wall was straight, even used rough saw timber inside and painted over it fur and all.

turns out the "young builder" was a hammer hand or laborer that worked for local builder and was doing side projects. 

I know this is a side topic but thought I might put in my two pennyworth.

I am a carpenter and (putting false modesty aside) a good one though now retired. The issue I found when I moved to New Zealand was one of perception, my clients always insisted on referring to me as "their builder" even after it was pinted out that I was a carpenter and it takes a whole gamut of trades combined to make a builder, it is hardly surprising that a young and impressionable lad faced with this will take on the mantle.

Regarding the deeper malaise within the NZ construction industry my view is that this is almost entirely due to the practise of self certification. No tradesman is going to finish on a Friday and think to himself "well I didn;t do that very well, I will take it down on Monday and start again". Doesn't matter if it is clergy, the law, politicians or indeed anybody else it has been proved over and over again that self regulation simply does not work. If you have independant and qualified inspectors then if the job is done properly it remains and if not then it fails as simply as that.

  • Like 3
  • Disagree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tommy dave said:

i am curious as to why mods and the forum owner (see the reaction from @Grant to my post recommending posting the trademe id) are opposed to identifying the vendor in this sorry situation.

is it fear of risk of litigation?

"Fair Go" and rising above the small thinkers and questionable traders.

 

I was always tort to put myself in other people shoes before I acted.

There has been a report to Trademe and had I not been informed by another new beekeeper here I may not have reposted it. As for TM I do not have faith in TM after my stolen professional camera equipment was sold there and over 150k in stolen car, damage to a building and equipment had happened . Im not standing by Im watching 

But Grant what if this was a first sign of Verroa its a fact most people will turn the other cheek, say nothing, do nothing? 

If I do expose someone it will be my choice to do so and in my time, it would be a last resort.

 

I don't want to give anymore energy to this than I have to its now well known this guy is a crook 5000 trades on TM and with 92 negative, 182 natural feedbacks, but I will not shy away from responsibilities lacking a back bone.

I do not want to see other taken for a ride?

Already 93 people feel that way self included after what the experts in this forum have pointed out. Every thing is an option so if some ask me to expose a crook I want to be sure I have exhausted every possible avenue before doing anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DuncanCook said:

I know this is a side topic but thought I might put in my two pennyworth.

I am a carpenter and (putting false modesty aside) a good one though now retired. The issue I found when I moved to New Zealand was one of perception, my clients always insisted on referring to me as "their builder" even after it was pinted out that I was a carpenter and it takes a whole gamut of trades combined to make a builder, it is hardly surprising that a young and impressionable lad faced with this will take on the mantle.

Regarding the deeper malaise within the NZ construction industry my view is that this is almost entirely due to the practise of self certification. No tradesman is going to finish on a Friday and think to himself "well I didn;t do that very well, I will take it down on Monday and start again". Doesn't matter if it is clergy, the law, politicians or indeed anybody else it has been proved over and over again that self regulation simply does not work. If you have independant and qualified inspectors then if the job is done properly it remains and if not then it fails as simply as that.

What dose this have to do with the price of fish?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alanbee said:

What dose this have to do with the price of fish?

I am sorry if my post offended you @Alanbee that was not my intention the comparison with building workers and aspiring beekeepers was made earlier in this thread, I am very new to beekeeping and doubt there are many subscribers to this forum less qualified than me to comment on bees and beekeeping, however I felt that nearly 50 years in the construction industry both in UK and here in NZ did qualify me to speak on that aspect of the discussion.

I do sympathise with your dilemma but suspect that it may be a case of caveat emptor, hopefully you will manage to get a refund and then it may be worth considering watching this site and other sources with the aim of getting a good strong Spring nuc and getting off to a flying start.

  • Like 2
  • Stirrer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DuncanCook said:

I am sorry if my post offended you @Alanbee that was not my intention the comparison with building workers and aspiring beekeepers was made earlier in this thread, I am very new to beekeeping and doubt there are many subscribers to this forum less qualified than me to comment on bees and beekeeping, however I felt that nearly 50 years in the construction industry both in UK and here in NZ did qualify me to speak on that aspect of the discussion.

I do sympathise with your dilemma but suspect that it may be a case of caveat emptor, hopefully you will manage to get a refund and then it may be worth considering watching this site and other sources with the aim of getting a good strong Spring nuc and getting off to a flying start.

No offence taken I just felt it was off topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Grant said:

Since when do you have any right to demand the person be identified on a global public platform?

  • The complaint is still being processed and has not been resolved

 

And wont be because the guy is doing a runner.

 

Quote
  • The complaint does not involve you, nor me, nor the site. We are not a lynch mob.

 

Yes, but a key component of the forum is uncensored freedom of expression, with legally acceptable parameters.

 

Quote
  • We've been in a position to advise the OP that its not right and they've been able to approach the seller with a valid complaint as a result. That is what was asked of us, and that is our win point.

 

Agree in part.

 

Quote
  • If the complainant can be identified as an individual through the link ID (rather than a company), or worse gets named, then the person who posts that information WILL be in breach of the privacy act.

 

 

I don't recall anything in the privacy act that would cover that.

 

The only "trouble" anyone can get in is if you make a statement of fact and it is not fact and detrimental to the person concerned or you express a negative opinion that is not reasonably held, and then are sued.

 

This guy, whoever he is, is a commercial hazard and I say that has been established and that not naming the guy involved is a real cop out, and does a disservice to all the users of the forum and others who may end up buying a nuc from him and getting burnt.  Or would you rather he just continue on defrauding people willynilly?  Wjhat would be the difference from Fair Go, for example?

 

My thoughts anyway, freedom of speech is worth standing up for, I expect I'll now get nuked though :-)  Time to go hide in the bunker.

 

 

Edited by CraBee
  • Like 2
  • Good Info 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CraBee said:

 

And wont be because the guy is doing a runner.

 

Yes, but a key component of the forum is uncensored freedom of expression, with legally acceptable parameters.

 

Agree in part.

 

I don't recall anything in the privacy act that would cover that.

 

The only "trouble" anyone can get in is if you make a statement of fact and it is not fact and detrimental to the person concerned or you express a negative opinion that is not reasonably held, and then are sued.

 

This guy, whoever he is, is a commercial hazard and I say that has been established and that not naming the guy involved is a real cop out, and does a disservice to all the users of the forum and others who may end up buying a nuc from him and getting burnt.  Or would you rather he just continue on defrauding people willynilly?  Wjhat would be the difference from Fair Go, for example?

 

My thoughts anyway, freedom of speech is worth standing up for, I expect I'll now get nuked though :-)  Time to go hide in the bunker.

 

@CraBeeIm not saying I will not name him I need to let trademe do their thing first. His bees are still at my place . For the most part I agree with you but "copout" no! I have a history catching people on film doing things they should not have. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Grant said:

Since when do you have any right to demand the person be identified on a global public platform?

  • The complaint is still being processed and has not been resolved
  • The complaint does not involve you, nor me, nor the site. We are not a lynch mob.
  • We've been in a position to advise the OP that its not right and they've been able to approach the seller with a valid complaint as a result. That is what was asked of us, and that is our win point.
  • At the time of responding to you the seller was indicating they will refund, therefore coming to an appropriate resolution with the purchaser.
  • Its nothing to do with us, there is a complaint process on TM
  • The individual selling, does not necessarily have a right of reply here to balance the viewpoint or provide their side of the story
  • There is enough information here to do your own homework to work out who it is and therefore avoid dealing with them in the future, or if you really need to, you can ask via conversation.
  • If the complainant can be identified as an individual through the link ID (rather than a company), or worse gets named, then the person who posts that information WILL be in breach of the privacy act.

 

i think thats a little over the top.

no one has put up any details of the person that isn't already in the public arena. the entire transaction is free to view online by anyone.

 

i think we have a duty of responsibility to help expose and highlight these sorts of events to protect our industry and hobby. 

i know of cases on other forums that where quite successful in catching them.

Edited by tristan
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling someone dishonest, corrupt, hypocritical, lazy, incompetent, criminal, unfaithful, or financially troubled are examples of defamation. But beware! It includes what ordinary readers or viewers see or hear “between the lines”. The courts will look at the “sting” of the article. Proving the literal truth of the words won’t help if the sting is an inference.

 

Your opinion is covered under a rule whereby your opinions must be: clearly comment, not assertions of fact, based on provable facts set out or referred to in the story and honestly believed. You also have the defence of truth, if you prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the story was true. Minor errors may be excused, but not those that go to the heart of the defamatory sting or stings. Even when a story is true, however, it can sometimes be hard to prove. 

 

Outside of these factors you are at risk.

 

However as already discussed you cannot name, link or infer to an individual, (which it is in this case) under the privacy act

 

On top of all that you have the Harmful digital Communications Act which has 10 principles

 

  • A digital communication should not disclose sensitive personal facts about an individual.
  • A digital communication should not be threatening, intimidating, or menacing.
  • A digital communication should not be grossly offensive to a reasonable person in the position of the affected individual.
  • A digital communication should not be indecent or obscene.
  • A digital communication should not be used to harass an individual.
  • A digital communication should not make a false allegation.
  • A digital communication should not contain a matter that is published in breach of confidence.
  • A digital communication should not incite or encourage anyone to send a message to an individual for the purpose of causing harm to the individual.
  • A digital communication should not incite or encourage an individual to commit suicide.
  • A digital communication should not denigrate an individual by reason of his or her colour, race, ethnic or national origins, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability.

 

As the topic has been dealt with and is now completely off track, its being closed.

  • Like 1
  • Disagree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...