Underdosed Gear and Your Source

[nmk85roll]

Here's an odd question that I'm not really sure on what's "proper".

The scenario... Joe Schmoe orders 30 amps of ICN's from a source. The source sends him 25 amps of lot 0020 and 5 from another lot. Reports have come out that lot 0020 is only dosed at ~180mg/ml as apposed to the labled 250mg/ml.

Is Joe Schmoe shit out of luck, or does he have the right to ask his source if he'll make up for the underdosed amps?

I guess it comes down to that this source is a VERY good one. Very honest, and great service. But does Joe Schmoe even hold the right to ask the source that?

[Berzerker]

What's the harm in asking? He can only say no. Then, you'll know where he's coming from.

[jack hust]

i dont think you do the source has no way of knowing or being responsible for a amp being underdose that is the risk of the buyer imo , if you ask him and he says no i would not hold that agint him or her

[nmk85roll]

Originally posted by jack hust
i dont think you do the source has no way of knowing or being responsible for a amp being underdose that is the risk of the buyer imo , if you ask him and he says no i would not hold that agint him or her

Right, but if it's a good and reliable source, he should take responsibility for his gear as being top notch, shouldn't he? I mean he IS advertising it at 250mg/ml yet he's not selling it at 250mg/ml

[jack hust]

Originally posted by depdaddy
good point..the source bought the amps thinking they were accurately dosed..he didnt make them so i dont think hes responsible..however if he wanted to help make up for it by selling you a few others at discount that would up to him...you cant hold it against him..hes in the same predicament that you are in..however if they are fake then a good source should refund and the source go after his source for re-embursement....just my 2 cents worth
dep

i agreee with taht 100%

[mcbvr6]

You asked for 30 amps of ICN's - you got 30 amps of ICN's. Not his fault if they are underdosed. Besides, I would have to see the report to believe that ICN's are underdosed.

If the amps showed up overdosed or overfilled, would you call your source and ask him how much extra money you owed him? How would you respond if he called you and said, "those amps I sent you last month tested out at 300 mgs instead of 250, so I'm going to need you to send me another $60"?

[gearedup]

Originally posted by depdaddy
good point..the source bought the amps thinking they were accurately dosed..he didnt make them so i dont think hes responsible..however if he wanted to help make up for it by selling you a few others at discount that would up to him...you cant hold it against him..hes in the same predicament that you are in..however if they are fake then a good source should refund and the source go after his source for re-embursement....just my 2 cents worth
dep

Good advice!

[Jay_Abbays]

Damn, It's been over 10 years since I studied contracts at Law School.

Let me have a whack at this one..... I'll try to make the legal analysis as brief as possible.......

First of all - buying or selling AAS is an illegal activity. A contract for an illegal activity is void. Thus, it is not enforceable. From this point of view - Joe Schmoe is out of luck. (Caviat Emptore -- buyer be ware.)


If we set that aside and analyze the situation from the angle "if buying / selling AAS was legal - what remedies would Joe Schmoe have?"

In the Law of Sales and Contracts it would probably go down under implied warranty/merchantability. In other words we have to look at the contract formation to see if it was "as is" or some warranties were implied.


It's important to understand the difference between them.

For example, when you buy at a thrift/pawn shop as well as flea markets and on line auctions --- many of these contracts are formed "as is" and you have to pay (no refund) even if the idem is not as good as you expected it to be (there are exceptions - for the sake of time, I'm not going into those.)

The other types of sales contracts have "implied warranties" - for example when you buy a lawn mower from Sears and the label says "6 hrs pwrs - $450" - this label is a contract offer for $450 you will get 6hrs pwrd lawn mower" --- it implies that the product would work and have 6 horse powered engine."

In this case if your lawn mower does not perform to the standards that were "implied" in the sales contract - you can return it to the merchant (again, there are exceptions as well as opportunities to go after the manufacturer - we'll skip that)

Sears will refund the money and, as Depdaddy said, would go after the manufacturer for the refund.


Let's apply the reasoning to our case.
(Assuming buy/sell AAS is legal)

If the source contacted Joe Schmoe and sent a Price list where it said: "250mg/1c of test E --- $10"
This is a clear case of implied warranty --- where for $10 you get 250mg or Test E" --- thus, you should contact your source for a refund/exchange.

However, if the source said --- I have 1 amp of Test E, people say this stuff is good, I never used it, it says 250mgs, do you want if for $10?"
There's no implied warranty (arguably.)


To summarize:

If the contract was made as a part of ongoing business - (ex. price list with doses, etc.) - there's implied warranty and Joe can ask for refund/exchange.

On the other hand buying/selling AAS is illegal, thus the contracts are void and not enforceable.

It's good for both parties to have a clear picture of the contract they have.
Ask your source about exchange policy, about under dosing etc.

I think, a good, reliable source, who runs this business as any good business should be run --- will always cooperate with you -- AAS are ongoing sales, thus, you are a customer.

My 0.2 cents


Jay

[Jay_Abbays]

PS Regarding if the gear is overdosed - should the buyer send extra money?

The answer is NO (as long as no harm to the buyer was done due to overdosing)

THis is a clear merchant responsibility.

If the merchant sells 1lb of sugar, but actually delivers 1.3lb - It's merchants responsibility.

The major exception is when the buyer knows that the merchant is making a mistake (for example buyer gets a 20lb bag of sugar instead of 1lb )

[mcbvr6]

Let me start by saying that you are a nerd, but having gone to law school you already know that. Now, on to the debate.

Setting aside the legality issue, which makes this whole discussion pointless, this would be covered by Article 2 of the UCC, as the amps would be considered "goods" - again setting aside any exceptions for medical supplies or goods, because we certainly aren't treating them that way in their purchase.

Under the UCC there are two potential implied warranties - merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. Unless the customer was relying on the source to design their cycle for them and select the appropriate gear, "fitness for particular purpose" is out.

This leaves us with merchantability. To be merchantable, they need only be of "fair average quality within the description". Coming in at 180 instead of 250 could likely be argued either way. However, we would also need to know if the amp was overfilled, as ICN's tend to be, because that would make up the difference obviously. Merchantability is not a particularly hard standard to achieve.

However, this is all irrelevant, as we are talking about illegal goods. And I still say he ordered 30 and he got 30, they aren't fake. The buyer can check the quality just as easy as the seller. If he had said "don't give me any of lot X because they are underdosed" then he might have something. But it isn't like the source can go back to the manufacturer (as in your Sears example) and get a refund from the lab.

BTW, if you have to say some is "clear" then it isn't.

[nmk85roll]

Originally posted by mcbvr6
You asked for 30 amps of ICN's - you got 30 amps of ICN's. Not his fault if they are underdosed. Besides, I would have to see the report to believe that ICN's are underdosed.

If the amps showed up overdosed or overfilled, would you call your source and ask him how much extra money you owed him? How would you respond if he called you and said, "those amps I sent you last month tested out at 300 mgs instead of 250, so I'm going to need you to send me another $60"?

I believe the underdosing was published in the new Anabolics 2004. That's at least where i got the idea from.

And no, you shouldn't pay the source if they amps are overdosed. Now, as it was stated before, if he sent me 60 amps instead of 30, I would definately either send the extra back or pay for it. Because THAT's good, honest business.

Anyway, I think this is one of the best discussions I have seen on this board in a long time. Lets get some more opinions!

[FUZO]

I AGREE WITH JACK AND DEP. ITS ALL BULL SHIT RUMORS ANY WAY UNLESS YOU GET IT TESTED.AND IF YOUR UN HAPPY E MAIL THE PERSON

[ZedsDead]

if i am buying gear like ICN or organon sust as opposed to UG i think its a good idea to ask for the batch numbers first, the source shouldnt have a problem emailing them to you then u can do your homework and avoid this problem completly

[NeverSatisfied]

Originally posted by mcbvr6
You asked for 30 amps of ICN's - you got 30 amps of ICN's. Not his fault if they are underdosed. Besides, I would have to see the report to believe that ICN's are underdosed.

If the amps showed up overdosed or overfilled, would you call your source and ask him how much extra money you owed him? How would you respond if he called you and said, "those amps I sent you last month tested out at 300 mgs instead of 250, so I'm going to need you to send me another $60"?

i agree

[MYRICK]

LOOK ASK HIM IF HE SAYS NO DONT HOLD IT AGAINST HIM SIMPLE AS THAT