Need help with Ebay buyer having issues with a lathe chuck

[ARC-170]

He's not talking about the little thread thing you're referring to.

I believe I see a major fracture surface all the way 'round the inside bore of the chuck. See red arrows. That's the back side of the front casting (which is why he's showing a photo of the back side).

If that is indeed the case, I think the right thing to do here is give him a full refund. Even if your original listing did show a photo of it, if you listed it as 'used' instead of 'for parts', then the implication is that it works.

I sell a bunch of stuff on eBay as well. Sometimes stuff like this inadvertently slips through. It sucks, but you've just got to step up and do the right thing.


View attachment 390051

Interesting observation. I think the roughness you are referring to looks like the rough casting surface, not a fracture. And, what is actually broken? Was there something attached to this that is now gone? I may try to look up this chuck and see what, if anything, is supposed to be there.

I may tell him to send it back so I can look at it myself.

 

[JRaut]

That whole ring inside (between my red arrows) looks to me like it may be a fracture surface, no?

Perhaps it could just be rough casting, but that's a bit hard for me to believe, as the chuck is machined all around everywhere else.

Seems weird that the jaw teeth are so exposed when viewed from the back. I'm not sure what used to be there, but seems there was probably something there.

Refunding the buyer and asking for the chuck to be returned is certainly reasonable. You'll have to pay shipping, of course.

EDIT: It wouldn't hurt to ask him for a close-up photo so you can get a better idea of what's going on though.

 

[JRaut]

You can see it a bit more clearly from the other photo.

The machined 'top side' of the T-slot is clearly visible (blue arrow). Looks to me like a whole spigot fractured off right at the T-slot interface (red arrow).

 

[woodchucker]

@JRaut are you the buyer?

I can't see all those defects you point out in #12.

The area in #13 in blue appears to be a machined area. Probably part of where the jaw slides in and out of, since it's on both sides.
Unless you show a better pic of the defects, there's not enough evidence.

 

[JRaut]

@JRaut are you the buyer?

I can't see all those defects you point out in #12.

The area in #13 in blue appears to be a machined area. Probably part of where the jaw slides in and out of, since it's on both sides.
Unless you show a better pic of the defects, there's not enough evidence.

I'm not the buyer, no.

But my eyes see a pretty obvious fracture surface.

Not sure why things need to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt here.....

The buyer clearly sees something wrong, and he's the one holding it in his hands looking at it. He kindly (and reasonably) asked for a partial refund based on what he perceives as a damaged and unusable chuck.

@ARC-170 asked for recommendations on what to do. So I gave my recommendation: I believe I see what the buyer is referring to, and I think a refund is in order (and asking for the chuck to be returned is absolutely reasonable so that @ARC-170 can check it out himself).


In my #13 I said that the blue arrow was a machined part of the T-slot. So I absolutely agree. Everywhere else in that general plane (i.e., red arrow) looks to me like it's a fracture surface.

 

[ErichKeane]

That area just looks like rough-casting to me... I can see that same texture all the way around, so unless a TON of material broke off in 3 parts (leaving the machined pads in place the exact way on all the jaw faces we can see), I think that is all we are seeing.

The jaw teeth get exposed in the back on just about every chuck when the jaws get closed, I've never seen a jaw that wasn't teeth all the way across the back side, AND every chuck I've seen has a hole down the center for material to pass through, so it would seemingly be necessitated.

IMO, the situation sounds like the guy is being honest and reasonable. I'd probably ask for a better picture of what he means, then if it is legit, give him whatever seems reasonable as a partial refund.

 

[markba633csi]

I think I see now, the locating ring for the scroll is missing/ broken off- right? That fractured-looking surface is where material should be
-maybe kinda sorta

 

[ARC-170]

Here's my replay to the buyer:

I'm sorry this didn't meet your expectations. I thought that was just the rough casting surface, not any sort of breakage. I try to get really good pictures so buyers can see everything; I'm not interested in deception! . How much of a refund?

Here is his response:
Never meant to say I was deceived. My fault for not seeing the breakage on your pix. I figure I should be able to get some monies back if I list the jaws and the scroll. With this in mind how about you give me a break in price of an item in the future?

My thoughts:
I thought I would just put this to bed and give him some money. He's not answered me regarding that. My comment about deception was meant to mean I want to make sure buyers know exactly what they are getting and that I'm not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes or misrepresent anything. I don't have much to sell in the future, either.

 

[ARC-170]

I think I see now, the locating ring for the scroll is missing/ broken off- right? That fractured-looking surface is where material should be
-maybe kinda sorta

Maybe. The scroll worked just fine, and there was plenty of "meat" left there to locate the scroll. I'd need to see it again to see how rough the surface is.

I wonder if there was something more substantial there that was broken off? I thought the three holes on the outside of the chuck were for mounting it with bolts, and I listed this as such. It may have been a screw-on chuck, but that doesn't explain the 3 holes around the outside. I couldn't easily find another chuck like this to compare.

 

[woodchucker]

Gotta question, is that a low profile chuck?

It doesn't seem nearly as deep as my chuck (without it's backplate). The pic on the plaid looks very shallow..
The other pics don't look that deep either.