I said I would apologize to Debi if anything I said was incorrect. I am not in any way insinuating that you and Ed are the "fourth party".
Jim told me he was going to address the inaccuracies of your posting. I am not surprised you knew nothing of the transaction until recently, as of course Jim has been trying unsuccessfully to get a refund directly from Debi but after a couple of months of inaction and avoidance on her part feels exhausted in dealing with this LAMP-Approved dealer. Perhaps my mother raised me differently, but she always told me that if I accepted money for something that turned out to be fake, I absolutely was 100% responsible for refunding that person. If Debi needs to get a lawyer to figure out a way not to refund Jim, well I guess that is certainly up to her. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Susan Poole" <[email protected]> To: "Sean Linkenback" <[email protected]>, [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 9:43:02 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: RE: [MOPO] Outed at last - Avoid this LAMP approved dealer I thought you were going to apologize to Debi for causing her distress? You obviously don't know the facts so keep out of it. If you are insinuating that we are the "fourth party" you are DEAD WRONG. We knew nothing of this transaction until a couple of weeks ago. Before Jim addresses inaccuracIes himself, WHY DON'T YOU ADDRESS YOUR INACCURACIES FIRST instead of trying to divert attention elsewhere! If Jim wants to address this situation, WHY DIDN'T HE DO IT FIRST. I'm not sure what inaccuracies Jim is going to unveil regarding our conversation -- it was pretty much straightforward. He told us that one of our "LAMP Dealers" was refusing to refund his money for a fake. Ed simply told him that it was him (Ed) who advised Debi to go to an attorney to make sure that she reserved her rights and obtained the necessary documentation and poster to proceed against the other parties involved. .Why is that such an unreasonable suggestion? There were other parties involved and this is not an "open and shut" case. "OK, now I will leave it to Jim" - why didn't you "leave it to Jim" in the first place. Sue From: MoPo List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sean Linkenback Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 08:23 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MOPO] Outed at last - Avoid this LAMP approved dealer well I believe we just heard from "fourth party acting as agent", but Jim has just informed me he will respond to your other inaccuracies himself, so I will leave it at that. No, I won't - I love your comment of "the poster that Gresham received WAS NOT Debi's but was from Haggard." isn't that the same thing that Profiles could state, or Bruce (except of course he hasn't had any of these particular fakes), or anyone else that sold one of the fakes? It's exactly what Bruce was referring to when he said people are denying responsibility. Jim did not pay Haggard for this particular piece, he paid Debi. It is therefore her responsibility to accept. Ok, now I will leave it to Jim. ----- Original Message ----- From: Susan Poole To: 'Sean Linkenback' ; [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 9:03 PM Subject: RE: [MOPO] Outed at last - Avoid this LAMP approved dealer When you make an accusatory statement such as this on a public forum you should first know all the facts and not present just part of them -- in all fairness to the parties involved. I can only assume that you are referring to the "convoluted transaction" that transpired a year ago between Gresham, Haggard (who Debi didn't even know and still doesn't), Debi and a fourth party acting as an agent. The transaction involved a poster Debi owned that Haggard wanted. He wanted to trade one of his posters along with some cash. By the end of this transaction, the poster that Gresham received WAS NOT Debi's but was from Haggard. Now, a year later, Gresham is demanding Debi refund the money but refusing to provide a report establishing that it is indeed a fake, without returning the alleged fake piece and telling her NOT to seek the advice of an attorney. We told Debi and Gresham that we suggested that Debi NOT proceed until she had time to speak with her attorney on how to proceed and protect her rights against one or all of the parties involved in this tangled mess. Debi wants to do the right thing and has not refused to refund the money -- she just wants to protect her rights to proceed. If not, Debi is then left with no money and no poster. To date, Gresham REFUSES to even send the fraud report and he HAS NOT assured her that she will get the "alleged" fake poster back so that she can proceed against the other parties. NO REPORT -- NO POSTER -- NO ATTORNEY -- JUST SEND ME THE MONEY! She is simply being pressured to send a refund -- no questions asked. I don't know any business person in her situation who would not want to protect herself. This situation is NOT a straight up sale between two individuals and your email leads EVERYONE to believe that it was. Next time, why don't you just ASK the parties involved and get ALL the facts before you post an inflamatory email that could ultimately hurt Debi's business and cast doubt on LAMP dealers and sponsors. We have spoken with Debi in detail AND with Gresham in detail to make sure that we had all the facts . APPARENTLY YOU DIDN'T. Ed specifically told Gresham that he had advised Debi NOT to proceed without speaking with counsel and WE STAND BY THAT ADVICE. I would definitely question the motives of ANYONE who would advise a colleague NOT TO SEEK THE ADVICE OF AN ATTORNEY. Sue From: MoPo List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sean Linkenback Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 06:47 To: [email protected] Subject: [MOPO] Outed at last - Avoid this LAMP approved dealer For the past couple of weeks I have been openly wondering about whom Bruce was referring when he stated in one of his email messages: " It seems that some of those who unknowingly sold some of these as middlemen are taking the odd position that they have no liability in this, and that they want the people they unknowingly cheated to join them in lawsuits against those they obtained the fakes from, and that they won't be refunding those they unknowingly cheated." Naturally, I personally would not want to deal with anyone who was not accepting any responsibility in this sort of a situation. At last I have finally found the dealer (or at least one of them) that Bruce was hinting at: It is none other than Debi Jacobson from L'Imagerie Gallery in California. What is even worse is that Mrs. Jacobson is a LAMP approved dealer and supposedly represents the "very best our hobby has to offer." Apparently Mrs. Jacobson has known for a couple of months now that a lobby card she sold to a prominent collector has been determined by third-party authentication to be fake, and she has not made even an offer of one penny of restitution to the purchaser. This is another shameful black eye, and a horrible position for one of the supposed premier galleries in the hobby to take, but I guess it's ok to cheat people when you are LAMP-approved. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
