YOUR BROKEN SCOOTER

Dewey

Dewey

BEADY!
AliAnderson said:
For Scott Trainer... Bent districts and snapped suicides.
webcam-toy-photo1.jpg
Click to expand...
dont look like suicides to me
 
issac p

issac p

Silver Member
yeah. those snapped bars aren't suicides. suicides have a structure similar to crows, and they have a square crossbar.
 
Ronnie Bergan

Ronnie Bergan

Steel Member
Yes they are. The crossbar just doesnt look like it in the picture. I can tell that they are, plus, why would he lie about something that small?
 
TheObserver

TheObserver

Steel Member
The cross bar is square, and has concave on top, therefore they are suicides. Plus I remember him talking about it a while ago.
Back on topic now please.
 
notaek

notaek

Steel Member
ColtonF said:
The cross bar is square, and has concave on top, therefore they are suicides. Plus I remember him talking about it a while ago.
Back on topic now please.
Click to expand...

i think its the new v2s that have the square cross bar so those are probably just v1s
im not 100% sure on that though
 
R-Dubya

R-Dubya

Steel Member
Hep Greg said:
this is in regards to the proto fork....


you guys cant expect EVERY SINGLE steel scooter part to be made perfectly. there's bound to be defects/mishaps, its not like steel parts are put into a CNC machine and created to perfection like aluminum parts. for steel parts you have to build a jig, and try to line up everything perfectly before you weld it. not nearly as error-proof as a CNC machine... gotta keep that shit in mind. i know it sucks to be one of the few people who gets one of those defected parts, but at least we're at the point in the sport where companies have the decency and the resources to replace this stuff. you guys should show a liiittle more appreciation for the people who've worked so hard to get to this point where you all actually have a huge choice in the parts that you get to ride. just my 2 cents, not trying to pick a fight. just trying to put things into perspective.
Click to expand...

The problem isn't with him receiving a broken fork, it's with Proto asking him for more money to ship a replacement. That isn't how it works. He already paid the money to receive a functioning fork, and paid shipping for said fork. The product he received was not as described. He legally deserves to get another fork without paying for more shipping because he already paid shipping for the usable fork that he never received in the first place. If he really wanted to, he could take it to court and win. Let me repeat that: If he really wanted to, he could take it to court and win. Look up the Sales of Goods act. Proto asking for him to pay shipping upon receiving damaged goods is completely illegal. It's also Proto's responsibility to pay him to ship the old fork back if they request that he does so. You can't just sell someone a broken part and then ask for more money from them, and frankly I'm surprised that Proto would even try to pull something like that.

EDIT: Unless he got the fork from a separate retailer, in which case everything I've said still applies, but to the retailer who sold him the fork.

EDIT 2: Addressing what I've bolded, it isn't even a matter of decency and having the correct resources. When you sell someone a defective product, you have a legal obligation to replace it. Period.
 
TomK

TomK

Super Moderator
Staff member
Those bars aren't suicides. Those have a crossbar that goes all the way across. Suicides have two that are welded together by a square crossbar. Those look like grit bars to me.
 
Robert

Robert

Tr0ll
R-Dubya said:
The problem isn't with him receiving a broken fork, it's with Proto asking him for more money to ship a replacement. That isn't how it works. He already paid the money to receive a functioning fork, and paid shipping for said fork. The product he received was not as described. He legally deserves to get another fork without paying for more shipping because he already paid shipping for the usable fork that he never received in the first place. If he really wanted to, he could take it to court and win. Let me repeat that: If he really wanted to, he could take it to court and win. Look up the Sales of Goods act. Proto asking for him to pay shipping upon receiving damaged goods is completely illegal. It's also Proto's responsibility to pay him to ship the old fork back if they request that he does so. You can't just sell someone a broken part and then ask for more money from them, and frankly I'm surprised that Proto would even try to pull something like that.

EDIT: Unless he got the fork from a separate retailer, in which case everything I've said still applies, but to the retailer who sold him the fork.

EDIT 2: Addressing what I've bolded, it isn't even a matter of decency and having the correct resources. When you sell someone a defective product, you have a legal obligation to replace it. Period.
Click to expand...

Why thank you sir, thats what i was trying to say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top