Complaint Review: DBA Dick Mattleson - Hartford Connecticut

Well, he sent new merchandise. The suits were severely wrinkled, and packaged in grocery store plastic bags. The 10 shirts had disgusting yellow stains, and the suits, despite me telling him what size to send, did not fit. He wants me to send them back, and pay for shipping on yet another return. I think we're just going to eat this transaction as a bad one. We're going to send the pictures to PayPal, and if they don't do anything, it's our loss. I think we may still file a criminal complaint against him, just for public record. We'll base this on the fact that he refused to ship the merchandise for over 30 days without a ridiculous handling fee that wasn't agreed upon prior... then all of a sudden, when threatened with criminal charges, he sends merchandise. He sent merchandise he KNEW wouldn't fit, and was BADLY stained.. I believe he did this just to avoid criminal charges. I still want this on public record, but I'm not wasting too much more time on this man. He's dishonest, as all of his actions prove. I'll post the pictures on the website.

I believe Mr. Mattleson and I have reached a point where we can put this behind us. He's been cooperative and understanding, and has been provided the information that he has asked for. I have posted an apology on Dickmattleson.tophonors.com I would invite you to read it.

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #4791. It was sent by d**k Mattleson at [email protected]. They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report: Their email: [email protected] Their name: d**k Mattleson Their phone number: 860/233/1819 Their relationship to the company: Owner Rebuttal: SELLER is responding to the most recent comments of this CUSTOMER of April 3rd: SELLER has read the comments of the CUSTOMER and has nothing new to add to the RIPOFF REPORT at this time. If CUSTOMER does not wish to exchange information through the Internet, a casual conversation via telephone can be arranged to learn the facts surrounding the delay of the merchandise. If a telephone conversation can be arranged, then the SELLER will reconsider the request for refund. This is because the SELLER can get a better understanding of the delay to find out the facts better. If a refund were in the works, then the return of the merchandise would be moot. However, if by internet or telephone information can NOT be exchanged for the purpose of learning why the merchandise was delayed, then the merchandise can be returned to this CUSTOMER by COD means at the request of this CUSTOMER. SELLER can return merchandise to this CUSTOMER for the COD expense of $11.00 plus UPS COD fee of $6.00 plus pick up fee of $1.00 or a grand total due this CUSTOMER shipped COD $18.00. The $18.00 would be actual expense of dispatching the merchandise COD to this CUSTOMER using the UPS charts for rate information. SELLER will not charge any handling expense. SELLER will wait for this CUSTOMER'S instructions or COD approval. SELLER can dispatch the merchandise with instructions that $18.00 will be due from this CUSTOMER for the release of the merchandise. d**k Mattleson 80 Tremont Street Hartford, Connecticut 06105-3069 [email protected] 860/233/1819

Great news everyone!!!!!!!! I was just re-reading his policy, dated 2/23/01 and it states "Buyer pays for return insured shipping. Your money will be cheerfully refunded." PLEASE NOTE.. It does not mention, anywhere in the text "handling." This means that his refusual to send the parcel back without "handling" is not only unreasonable, it IS infact EXTORTION! Absolutely beautiful.. the icing on the cake with putting this guy away where he belongs. He's illegally holding merchandise that doesn't belong to him.. He was asked to return the merchandise COD for actual shipping and insurance charges, and HE REFUSED. He's now holding it for more fees that he's neither entitled to, and the customer never agreed to prior to the transaction. His asking for handling is now also a BREACH. Now he could be prosecuted for not only fraud, but also extortion. I couldn't be happier. My advice to anyone in this situation is SAVE YOUR E-MAILS. They have proven, in this case, to be invaluable. Not only do I have e-mails with this guy lying about not checking records (he checked UPS three days earlier, remember), NOW I have proof that he was and is trying to use extortion. He even PUBLICLY stated on here that he wouldn't send the merchandise back without handling fees! BEAUTIFUL!! LOL

He was offered several opportunities to return the merchandise, and he didn't... So, he won't be getting anymore offers to return the merchandise. Anything other than a refund is probably out of the question.

I just spoke to the police, and they said this brings it to a whole new level, and since it happened across state lines, it's a federal (FBI) matter!! Kim could be entitled to twice the amount (possibly more) given the circumstances. This keeps getting better and better!

Let this be a lesson to everyone just what can happen when dealing with online individuals and businesses (or individuals claiming to be businesses..LOL)

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #4791.
It was sent by d**k Mattleson at [email protected].

The Crooked Suitman d**k Mattleson rip-off auction on e-bay *REBUTTALs (#4791)

They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report:

Their email: [email protected]
Their name: d**k Mattleson
Their phone number: 860/233/1819
Their relationship to the company: Owner

Rebuttal:
SELLER is responding to the most recent comments by this CUSTOMER dated April 2, 2001:

SELLER has read and reviewed comments from CUSTOMER and has nothing new to add to the RIPOFF REPORT. SELLER formally requests at this time that the CUSTOMER file a dispute with PAYPAL, EBAY, BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU mediation, CREDIT CARD PROVIDER or other.

SELLER and CUSTOMER disagree.

SELLER is NOT able to get information directly from the CUSTOMER for the purpose of learning what caused the delay of the returning parcel. If and when this CUSTOMER wishes to cooperate with allowing SELLER to understand what caused the delay, then the SELLER will reconsider a refund request.

SELLER will present his evidence along with supporting documentation through a dispute process. SELLER will ask general overview questions directed to the CUSTOMER through a dispute process.

SELLER will continue to check the RIPOFF REPORT and simply acknowledge any new message left by this CUSTOMER. At this time, the SELLER firmly believes that all items, issues, and points have been covered through the RIP OFF REPORT.

SELLER proposes that not later than JUNE 15th, 2001, CUSTOMER file a formal written dispute. SELLER proposes that if no dispute has been filed by JUNE 15th, 2001, than the transaction is complete.

SELLER has the merchandise set aside safe and secure. SELLER regularly receives suits and wardrobe items from his clientele base for the purpose of alteration, trade in, exchange, and repairs. SELLER works on suits and wardrobe items in his care as a bailee. SELLER than returns these suits or other altered wardrobe items to their rightful owners for a shipping
and handling fee.

This CUSTOMER refuses to pay shipping and handling for the return of his property. SELLER can not return the merchandise without shipping and handling. This CUSTOMER has notified the SELLER, through e-mails, that the return of the merchandise to the CUSTOMER would be refused. SELLER is safekeeping merchandise and money until a dispute is formally filed or a
conclusion is reached. SELLER will hold money and merchandise until JUNE 15th, 2001 unless CUSTOMER demonstrates that he needs more time.

d**k Mattleson
80 Tremont Street
Hartford, Connecticut
06105-3069

[email protected]

860/233/1819

The seller is absolutely crazy to think a handling charge would be paid. He was told to send the merchandise back ** COD ** for ACTUAL shipping charges/insurance. HE REFUSED. I told him Kim would never agree to transfer more money to him, but to get rid of this jerk, she agreed to a COD for ACTUAL shipping charges (he can shove his handling fee.) When he started his games on 2/27/01, *** I *** told him that if he sent the merchandise back, I would refuse it. I promptly e-mailed him the next day and told him that I was in no legal position to tell him that, as the transaction was between him and Kim, so using that excuse bears no consequence. Since then, he's been asked to return it SEVERAL times. He either flat out refuses, or asks for a ridiculous, unreasonable, and borderline, if not, illegal amount of handling fee (2.5 times the actual shipping charge) than the actual shipping charges.) At one point, I believe he asked for $25.00. We sent the merchandise back to him for $10.11, via UPS/Fully insured. He's out of his mind, and is using an unreasonable handling fee as leverage. CAN WE SAY EXTORTION??? By his own admission, it's not his property, and despite the rightful owner instructing him to send it back, he has repeatedly refused. He will soon find out life doesn't work the way he thinks it does. What it comes down to is, he wants the money, and wants to keep the merchandise to resell it to get yet MORE money. He'll do anything illegal to accomplish this. I think he's proven that to everyone. He's holding merchandise illegally. He's unreasonable, and insulting my intelligence, not to mention aggrevating me.

The certified letter will arrive shortly, and a case has began with the Hartford Police Dept. (Major Crimes Division) If I have any say into it, I'll make sure his records and computer are seized, since this transaction took place online, and this is online fraud (misrepresentation, extortion, etc.) The e-mails (admissable) show an offer of COD, show him refusing to do anything, show him accepting a return, etc. etc. Forms were also picked up from the court today, and will be filled out and filed. When he is served, he will get all the information regarding the delay his heart could desire. If he would of absolutely agreed to a refund, then the information could of been provided directly, but he's not trusted, and "reconsider" isn't good enough. I can see the personal information being posted on the internet, so he can get it through the court, and if he posts it then, he's in even more trouble.

Interesting thing he keeps mentioning the Better Business Bureau. A complaint was filed with them, and they stated there's nothing they can do, because they determined he's an individual and NOT a business. At any rate, he can provide his "brief" to PayPal and the credit card company, but he'll also be providing it to the "Major crimes division" of his local police department, and the court. Hope it's better than what he's provided here, thus far. I printed out all of his e-mails, and this report, and showed them to our attorney.. he said "Ahh come on, let me handle this.." I laughed and said "No, that's not necessary, someone with the brain capacity of a monkey could handle this one." LOL :)

The seller has been directed to ship the merchandise back either at his own expense, or COD, and has REFUSED. He is therefore in no position to "safeguard" anything that doesn't belong to him. Maybe I should steal my neighbor's car, and "safeguard" it for him until he pays me a transportation fee of returning it to him. LOL :) I don't think the courts and police will look favorably upon him rising above the law (one might say making his own), though I could be wrong. ;)

Who thinks he should be reported to the IRS too? He is, afterall, operating a business as an individual. ;)

Well, it appears as if Mr. Mattleson's short stint of decency and willingness to cooperate has passed.

1.) I have told the seller on numerous occasions I am in no position to make a binding decision on this case, and that he should contact the CUSTOMER directly.

2.) Once again, I STRESS that Kim is the customer, and making references to rudeness, harrassment, and defamation "By the customer" is misleading, utterly false, and defamatory to Kim, the real customer.

3.) Seller has not substantiated the need or entitlement to such information. Providing personal information to someone illegally witholding merchandise and money is unrealistic. If the seller would agree to a refund based on that information, some documentation may be able to be provided. However, it's ludacrist to send personal information with no basis, and merely to satisfy an unusual fascination and obsession with an illness. It's quite disturbing to think that the seller believes if this case went to mediation, or litigation that he would somehow still be in a position to "approve or deny a refund request." That illustrates his clear lack of knowledge of the law. Once again, the seller is directed to contact the customer for further information.

4.) "Auction interference" and "Spamming" was not engaged in by "The customer." This statement is defamatory against the actual customer, and will be included in future proceedings. Nevertheless, I indicated a binding document would be included stating no further action would be taken by myself, or on behalf thereof.

5.) Despite my advice, The seller has not contacted the customer since 2/27/01. The seller was free, at any time, to tell me "Back off, and let me settle this with MY CUSTOMER." He did not, at any point. Furthermore, as for my "rudeness", it would be unreasonable to think that any caring husband would sit back and allow his wife to be taken advantage of by an alleged businessman that she put wholehearted trust into. My attitude towards him, at certain points may have been deemed immoral and inappropriate, however, if he is married, I'm sure he would do the same if in my position. At no point have I stated any mistruths to the public, including his customers. Therefore, his defamation accusation is ridiculous. I've told his customers that he lured Kim off of e-bay, and is now withholding merchandise and money.. THAT IS THE TRUTH.

6.) The seller is in no legal position to set an enforcable deadline, that may contradict local, state, and federal statutes of limitations. Again--making his own rules as he goes along.


I have given this seller SEVERAL opportunities to make this right, and at one point (before any of this action he refers to began), Kim told me to offer him approx. $70 less than the total balance for a refund - just to rid ourselves of this man, which he refused and proceeded to ask for more money (in the form of "handling" fees) for an exchange or return. I believe the previous proposal was that of a fair one. He would of had a legal binding document stating no further action would be taken, he would of had his own domain name, and he'd never have to deal with us again, and thankfully, vice-versa. Perhaps it is partly our fault for not pursing this much more vigorously. We've been trying to give him the benefit of the doubt, and have been waiting patiently while PayPal and the VISA company drag their feet. A small claims case could easily be filed for $15, and the clerk said that if he didn't show, then there could be a default judgment. Credit card interest, filing fees, travel expenses(if necessary) and other applicable sustained damages could be included, and his $483.60 debt could be upwards of $1000 depending on limits. I don't think he appreciates the fact that we're actually being NICE to him at this point. Nobody wants to be in court, but maybe that's the only option left. What he's not taking into consideration is the fact that on 2/27/01 (after he received the package), he wrote to Kim: "After the 5 days from the delivery signature, regardless of e-mails, if no deposit is made to a returning carrier, then the merchandise is the property of the customer. Title passes after 5 days." SO, leaving aside his promise to a refund, his acknowledgment, and acceptance of the return, he is in posession of property that does not belong to him, even by his own admission. He has PUBLICLY admitted he will not send back the suits, or refund the money. He could be subject to criminal prosecution, especially pending a judgment from the court. Again, I don't think he appreciates the decency that's been shown to him thus far, and he really should consider himself lucky--He's crossed the legal line, and Kim has chosen not to call him on it, THUS FAR. I've been trying to live out in my mind what the court case might be like, and it's actually somewhat amusing. The judge would have to look at the facts, which are:

1.) On 2/15/01 (three days after his alleged deadline) he sent an e-mail saying "Thank you for the heads up message. I'll keep watching for the returning parcel to arrive."

2.) On 2/24/01 he sent an e-mail saying "I will probably have the parcel on Monday. Thank-you for the tracking number. You
deposited the parcel with UPS on Wednesday Feb 21st, 2001 according to UPS."

3.) On 2/27/01 when I cornered him about how he arrived at the conclusion that accepting a return was not construed as a return, he said "I do not check records on returning parcels in transit. I check records when parcel finally arrive." He said that the above e-mails (2/15/01 and 2/24/01) were merely "acknoledgments" (Yeah right)

At that point the judge would probably ask us both questions such as: "Why was there such a delay in shipping the item back?" At which point we would explain the hardship and provide the documentation. "Mr. Mattleson, how do you explain your e-mails prior to receiving the package? Is it your standard practice to mislead customers?" and "Mr. Mattleson, you say you don't check records on parcels in transit, yet you said "Thank you for the tracking number. You deposited the parcel with UPS on Wednesday Feb 21st, 2001." You take the time to check UPS's records but not your own? Do you consider that to be appropriate business practice?"

Mr. Mattleson would more than likely, at that point state something to the effect of: "Well, the reason I refused to send the merchandise back, is because the plaintiff's husband was defaming me, harassing me, and causing me undue hardship." The judge would say "What did her husband say, Mr. Mattleson?" He would say "Well, he said I was acting fraudulent, misrepresented myself as a business, illegally withheld his wife's money and merchandise, and he was just plain rude to me." "Are you a licensed business in the State of Connecticut, Mr. Mattleson?" "Well, no." "Do you still have posession of the plaintiff's package, as well as money?" "Well, yes." "Which part of what he said isn't true, Mr. Mattleson?" "Well, none of it, but, your honor, he was interfering with my auctions and e-mailing my customers." "I don't see him named as a plaintiff, Mr. Mattleson, this is an entirely different case. Did the plaintiff, at any point, engage in slanderous and defamatory activity?" "No, I haven't communicated with her since February 27th"

Then, after probably 20 minutes, the judge would find for the plaintiff in the full amount asked for. I'm sure there would also be a period of laughter regarding how Mr. Mattleson views the law, and how he feels he is empowered to modify it to suit his needs.

The seller has one more chance, and one chance ONLY to provide a refund within 5 days, or the above scenario may soon become a reality. A certified letter will be promptly mailed to the address he provided stating such. I would strongly urge him to consider everything that I have mentioned, and consult with an attorney if necessary. The proposal I previously made regarding the website and domain name transfer will be honored should a voluntary refund be made, however, if a judgment is made by a third party, my involvement with this case would be nonexistant, and therefore all rights to the said websites and domain names will be retained by myself, indefinitely. Again, I would strongly urge Mr. Mattleson to consider this, and take a couple days to think about it BEFORE posting more information that will further hinder your case. If he so desires, I would be happy to allow Kim to initiate the domain and website transfers, as well as provide her with the cease-action letter, so Mr. Mattleson and I have no further contact.

The man is wonderful, isn't he?? Very persisting at spewing his rhetoric. Like I said in my previous statement, he consistently avoids the key points, and only addresses the ones that conveniently suit him. He still won't answer my previous questions and allegations.

Mr. Mattleson did NOT "immediately" dispatch the merchandise. The time period between payment and receiving of the merchandise was 9 days. I would agree that a "normal" customer would work with a legitimate and straight seller to cooperate, when there is relevance and consequence, however, at NO point did Mr. Mattleson specify WHY he wanted to know about the illness, or explain what bearing it would have. I was very cooperative with him in the beginning, until he started pressing the issue and asking more invasive questions. It made no sense to give him more information, when he didn't specify what his intentions were. Had he said "I understand, and if the documentation affirms what you have told me, I would have no problem providing a refund" I'm sure Kim wouldn't mind providing what she could, reasonably. At the time he began asking these questions, he had already said he wouldn't provide a refund, or provide an exchange/return without more money. Would you give someone who took advantage of you more personal information than he was entitled to??

His explanation of how he handles returns STILL makes no sense, and affirms his shady activity. He did more than merely "acknowledge" Kim's e-mails. He specifically said "I'll be watching for the parcel." On 2/24/01 he said "I should receive it Monday." He didn't just say "I got your message." Had he said "I got your e-mail, however, you're well beyond the return deadline, and therefore I will not be able to help you." At that point, we could of asked Mr. Mattleson to refuse the package. Had he said it when Kim communicated with him on the 15th, the package never would of been sent back to him. To use Mr. Mattleson's logic, as a BUYER, I believe Kim is entitled to an explanation as to why he encouraged the return, then played games after he had it in his hands. Am I the only one that smells something fishy?? Perhaps Mr. Mattleson needs to understand there is a line between agreements and acknowledgments. One could acknowledge an e-mail with a simple "I got your e-mail" or even go a step further and be honest about one's intentions and say "There's nothing I can do for you."

"An acknowledgement of customer messages, indicating that I have received word that a parcel is enroute to me, can not be construed as a change in SELLER'S policy." In all fairness, wouldn't it be the honest thing to do to say "I won't do anything for you" BEFORE he receives the package? I can only hope Mr. Mattleson understands why someone would be suspicious of this sort of activity and response. His story changes with the wind. At first he told me essentially e-mails aren't binding. Basically admitting to agreeing to the return. Now he's saying that he merely "acknowledged" the e-mail, and nothing more. Acknowledge--with a "I'll be watching. I should receive it Monday." Yeah right, acknowledgment. He even looked up the tracking information before he received it. He knew exactly what the situation was, and in my opinion, had full intentions of taking further advantage of my wife's trustworthiness all along.

Mr. Mattleson is trying to make it seem as though my wife had no communication with him, and after 2 weeks just decided the suits weren't wanted. Nothing could be further from the truth. The VERY SAME DAY of receiving them, she PROMPTLY e-mailed him and explained the issues to him. The fact that there was a period of delay between that e-mail and actual shipment should affirm to any clear-thinking individual that there was infact reasons why there was a delay. I don't know anyone who would want to risk a refund by waiting 2 weeks to return merchandise, if there wasn't a reason. That is neither here or there though, and is a moot point. He agreed to the return, and accepted it. If he was a stickler for policy, as he's conveniently claiming to be now, he should of been honest and either refused shipment, or communicated before the package arrived to him, what his intentions were.

He really shouldn't be talking about rudeness. He told my wife even a non english speaking idiot could understand his policy. Speaking of his policy, it states that the buyer has 90 days before forfeiting the merchandise. We are within that 90 days. Obviously d**k makes new rules up along the way... Rules that conveniently suit him.

If he is feeling that harrassed and defamed, and is suffering such a great loss, perhaps he should do the honest thing and provide a refund to end all of this action. I have not received any e-mails from any of the customers indicating that my warning was unwelcomed. Actually, I have had a positive response, and my warnings have been appreciated. I wish someone would of warned my wife before she engaged in a transaction with him. At any rate, I am not trying to sell anything in my messages, and it is pefectly within my legal rights to say what I wish, as long as it is not physically threatening. Perhaps Mr. Mattleson should remember that soliciting bidders to conduct business off of e-bay is also a violation of e-bay policy. He doesn't seem to have a problem with that. As I've explained to him before, the only way action will cease is with a refund, or court order. There are hundreds of websites exposing dishonest business practices by large companies. There is a paypalsucks.com, there are websites exposing Ford Motor Company, and other large manufacturers. The reason these websites exist, is because they can. If you are dishonest, you suffer the consequences--It's as simple as that. I have no tolerance and show no mercy to crooks, nor should I.

I tried being reasonable with Mr. Mattleson in the beginning, but he was uncooperative and insisted on being arrogant and making up his own rules. I even offered an online mediation service, which he refused. What does he have to fear?? If he's as honest as he claims to be, he should not worry about mediation.

d**k, instead of spewing your rhetoric about policies and the illness.. Why don't you address my previous issues. Such as you misrepresenting yourself as a business when you are infact nothing, inconsitencies in your address/phone number, and the other concerns I mentioned. Surely you can't be worried, since you claim you're on the up and up. So, let's hear it. Forget the private investigator contacting you. Have you ever heard of an investigator who is following someone's husband call the husband and say "Are you cheating on your wife.. You aren't?? Well, that's good enough for me." Use your head, for once. Besides, he's merely obtaining information that is public knowledge. This isn't a high-key surveillance operation with hidden cameras, and boom microphones. Get over yourself.

Once again, I strongly suggest you make this situation right. Unlike me, you ARE breaking the law. If you feel you're being defamed, then file suit... It doesn't take rocket science to figure out I'm not going anywhere.

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #4791.
It was sent by d**k Mattleson at [email protected].

The Crooked Suitman d**k Mattleson rip-off auction on e-bay *REBUTTALs (#4791)

They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report:

Their email: [email protected]
Their name: d**k Mattleson
Their phone number: 860/233/1819
Their relationship to the company: Owner

Rebuttal:
In response to latest the latest CUSTOMER'S message dated April 1st, 2001.


1. SELLER needs to know the spokesperson to deal with whether it is the husband or wife. SELLER will deal directly with that person. If both are involved that is fine so long as it is declared. SELLER was treated very rudely because SELLER dealt with the husband instead of the wife.

2. No settlement is in the works on SELLER'S behalf at this time due to lack of information forthcoming from this CUSTOMER. SELLER is not settling at this time. Rather the SELLER is voicing his exhaustive effort in trying to reach a conclusion through gaining information without success due to the rude, disrespect, bad attitude and insults. SELLER does not agree to the settlement terms proposed by this CUSTOMER.

3. SELLER needs to have questions answered surrounding the nature of medical illness so that a determination can be made as to refund. If the CUSTOMER refuses to answer overview questions and to supply supporting evidence this will cause the SELLER not to reach a favorable conclusion. To this date, SELLER has been told this information is not important, ilrevevant, or "none of your business" in a blatant rude and disrespectful attitude. This CUSTOMER needs to make a decision right here and right
now. Either supply the information requested to the SELLER direct or to an agency such as PAYPAL, EBAY, CREDIT CARD PROVIDER or MEDIATOR. One way or the other the SELLER will have access to this information in order to approve or deny a request for refund. The SELLER will eventually receive the information direct or indirect.

4.CUSTOMER'S proposal of deletion of websites, AUCTION INTERFERENCE, and SPAMMING is not a valid settlement on behalf of the CUSTOMER. CUSTOMER has proved to me that whatever can be deleted can immediately be restarted in 10 minutes under a slightly different name. CUSTOMER can at anytime create 20 new websites on a whim to restart AUCTION INTERFERENCE and SPAMMING Activity.

5.When this CUSTOMER is in a humane frame of mind, removed from rudeness, insults, disrespect, and very bad attitude, SELLER will be available for discussions. SELLER will not approach this CUSTOMER to start communications.

6.The proposed DEADLINE date for all discussions, filings, or disputes would be June 15th, 2001, unless CUSTOMER objects. If by June 15th, 2001, SELLER and BUYER have not reached a conclusion and the CUSTOMER has not formally filed a written transaction dispute, then SELLER hereby declares that the transaction is complete.

7.SELLER hasn't anything more to add to THE RIPOFF REPORT. All issues, points, and items have been presented. This reply is merely notice that the SELLER is NOT agreeing to the proposal set forth by this CUSTOMER.

d**k Mattleson
80 Tremont Street
Hartford, Connecticut
06105-3069

[email protected]

860/233/1819

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #4791.
It was sent by d**k Mattleson at [email protected].

The Crooked Suitman d**k Mattleson rip-off auction on e-bay *REBUTTALs (#4791)

They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report:

Their email: [email protected]
Their name: d**k Mattleson
Their phone number: 860/233/1819
Their relationship to the company: Owner

Rebuttal:
In answer to THIS CUSTOMER'S comments of April 1, 2001:

I have the original shipment sent to me by this customer intact. Anything that is pending is held to the side and protected. The suits, shirts, and silk neckties are still in the same box in a safe place.

This customer reviewed my EBAY listings in search of a valentine's present for her husband. This customer wasn't sure of size. I then sent to the customer questions, which would help me understand the husband's frame better. When the measurements came in, in my opinion, the husband appeared to have a 50 Regular frame. I then proceeded to put together my
inventory of 50 Regulars. At the time, I believe I provided the wife with some 30 to 40 choices of suits in different name brands, styles, and colors. This customer carefully reviewed my inventory list looking over pictures and descriptions. After careful consideration, this customer chose two suits and a lot of 10 shirts size 18 X 34/35 along with 2 silk neckties. The wife and myself came to terms to price. TERMS and CONDITIONS of purchase were reviewed. This customer liked the fact that I
offered an inspection/return provision with my offerings. This customer understood my 3-day inspection 5-day deposit with a carrier guidelines.

Both this customer and the SELLER felt comfortable with the price and TERMS and CONDITIONS. This customer paid for this transaction through PAYPAL using a CREDIT CARD. I immediately dispatched the shipment and waited for response, which is normal procedure from my end. I received word that the shipment did not meet the needs of this customer due to fitting. The suits were too tight. Understood from my end. I acknowledged receiving this customer's message indicating the suits were
not fitting. This customer requested a refund rather then explore better fitting suits. I acknowledge receipt of this customer's request for cash refund rather than a replacement/exchange. I instructed this customer to
return the merchandise the same day I was notified the suits did not meet the requirements of this customer.

In my business, many times CUSTOMERS will change their minds due to many reasons. At first they didn't like a color, but now they do. A suit, which doesn't fit well, now may be altered and kept. A customer earlier wanted a darker suit, but this lighter suit isn't too bad. I can go on and on with examples. So it is possible that a customer on first review of a garment will wish to return and later change his mind. Or, like a suit when first looking at the garment on arrival, then after a couple days decide it is not a good match with his wardrobe.

During the transaction and through to the end of the month of February this customer never related any emergency or problem coming from her end which would cause my TERMS and CONDITIONS to be altered. When a customer sends me a message, I responsibly acknowledge receipt instead of ignore the messages.

This customer is in the belief that due to messages relaying that a parcel was on the way back, and I accepted this parcel, that I hereby waived my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale AKA policy. Not so. An acknowledgement of customer messages, indicating that I have received word that a parcel is
enroute to me, can not be construed as a change in SELLER'S policy.

SELLER has the right to ask questions when a parcel is returned late to understand why. If the delay was due to medical reasons, the SELLER has the right to ask overview questions to ascertain dates and times. This customer is NOT and has NOT been cooperative in allowing me to ask questions surrounding this customer's medical condition for the purpose of deciding on the validity of refund. This customer has been rude, disrespectful and very difficult to deal with. A normal customer would allow questions from a SELLER for the purpose of checking reasons for delay. A normal customer would, with pleasure, cooperate and show what happened. This customer instead has labeled me as NOT normal to ask overview questions pertaining to the delay in returning shipment. This customer feels I do not have the right to ask questions. I think not and
disagree.

Please have this customer's private investigator contact myself so that I can supply whatever information is needed due this customer. I work very hard to deliver excellence in fine haberdashery backed always with an inspection/return policy. I am, to this day, suffering a great loss due to this customer's continuing and furthering his AUCTION/INTERFERANCE and
SPAMMING my entire customer base and present bidder population.

This customer is doing this illegal (In the eyes of EBAY) activity for revenge.

This customer feels that he is doing a public service by informing everyone of my customers and present bidders of his transaction.

d**k Mattleson
80 Tremont Street
Hartford, Connecticut
06105-3069

[email protected]

860/233/1819

It just occurred to me... Does d**k Mattleson even have the suits anymore?? I'd say it's more than possible that he resold the suits, and neither has the money or the merchandise anymore. It wouldn't surprise me a bit, and it certainly makes sense. An honest businessman would of refunded the money as promised.

It just occurred to me... Does d**k Mattleson even have the suits anymore?? I'd say it's more than possible that he resold the suits, and neither has the money or the merchandise anymore. It wouldn't surprise me a bit, and it certainly makes sense. An honest businessman would of refunded the money as promised.

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #4791.
It was sent by d**k Mattleson at [email protected].

They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report:

Their email: [email protected]
Their name: d**k Mattleson
Their phone number: 860/233/1819
Their relationship to the company: Owner

Rebuttal:
I am answering this buyer's most recent comments.

If this customer was indisposed, which caused the delay of the merchandise to be returned, I can not figure out why this was not alerted to me during my inspection period i.e. Feb 8th through the 13th. I was informed the merchandise was not to the customer's liking the same day the customer received the merchandise, Feb 8th---I responded immediately by asking the
buyer to return the merchandise for a cash refund. I still can not figure out why this buyer held onto the merchandise for a period of 13 days knowing full well my policy called for set guidelines for inspection and return.

The news of a Urinary Tract Infection surfaced due to my
inquiring as to why the package was delivered late. The Urinary Tract Infection news was not volunteered to me. In trying to learn the condition of the buyer, to see if she was bedridden or hospitalized, I asked a few questions to gain insight.

I was not given common courtesy asking simple overview questions. I was treated very rude with disrespect.

I was willing to offer house credit, or replacement to better fitting merchandise. This is my policy when merchandise is returned late. I do not offer a cash refund on late returned merchandise. However, since this customer is on a campaign of actively putting together HATE/HARASSING websites targeted toward my clientele and customer base in addition to my
present bidders, I am withholding doing anything at this time.

The customer is actively SPAMMING my business activity which is causing me much loss. I have been harmed, hurt, and defamed in revenge of this buyer not getting his cash refund. I have tried to stop this AUCTION INTERFERANCE activity. The customer is relentlessly continuing SPAMMING/AUCTION INTERFERANCE in trying to get revenge.

I ask the customer to have his private investigator contact myself. I will help in uncovering any piece of information needed this buyer. In my 5 years of selling on-line, going on 3 years with EBAY I offer excellent customer relations. My feedback speaks for itself. I have built good solid relationships both domestic and overseas.

The majority of my transactions are packages rather than single item purchases. Most clients/customers like to pick and chose a couple/three suits, a lot of 10 shirts, silk neckties for a lower price. I allow my customers to review inventory in their size looking over color, style, single and double-breasted styling. My inventory is computerized for easy reference. If a customer wants to see what I have in say a 50 Regular; I
am able to provide an inventory-listing group of perhaps 40 suits. If the same customer wants to see what I have in a 17 1/2 Neck 34/35-sleeve shirt I can provide perhaps 30 lots of shirts to chose from. It is not against EBAY policy to sell direct. EBAY will never warn, suspend or expel a seller for offering merchandise direct.

In offering packages, I negotiate terms directly with buyers with the understanding that everything is shipped subject to my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale. My customers like the fact that they have the privilege of inspection/return. I review the TERMS and CONDITIONS of purchase before a transaction takes place so all parties know and agree.
If a customer is planning a trip or indisposed then this fact comes out during the review of TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale. I dispatch my merchandise to an address provided by the customer. The customer knows of the inspection/return provisions, which leads to responsible decision making and follow through communications.

At no time did I ever waive my policy with this customer. If a policy was to be modified then I do this prior to a transaction. A policy change would require both buyer and seller to agree and carry clear language that a change has taken place. A simple acknowledgement that a package is on the way is not to be construed as a policy change. Or, in the event of an
emergency, why didn't the customer communicate to me during the period of Feb 8th and Feb 13th explaining that my policy could not be met.
Communication was not done in a responsible manner by the customer.
Silence, during the inspection period, on behalf of this customer, leads me to believe that the policy is being adhered to. I regularly get incoming parcels for alterations, exchanges, trade ins and replacements.

When parcels arrive, I check garments for necessary work or customer service. I do this when the parcel is in my hands because many times, I have found, customers will change their minds in deciding their preferences. I do not refuse parcels.

I received a communication from the husband, of the original buyer, directing me to communicate only with the husband as he was taking over from here on. I then followed the husband's request only communicating with the husband.

AUCTION INTERFERENCE/SPAMMING my customer base and current bidders in relating how this customer's transaction was carried out is not the righteous thing to do. This is simply revenge on the part of the buyer.

I have asked this buyer several times to file a dispute through PAYPAL, EBAY, or the CREDIT CARD PROVIDER. I have been ready to defend my explanation of this transaction supported by evidence. I ask now for this buyer to have his private investigator call or anyone else who wishes for any information on myself or business practices.


d**k Mattleson
80 Tremont Street
Hartford, Connecticut
06105-3069

[email protected]

860/233/1819

"A simple acknowledgement that a package is on the way is not to be construed as a policy change." Is this guy serious?? What the hell is that supposed to mean then?? My question has always been "Why didn't you tell her that sending the package back would be a waste of time.. You're beyond my policy."????? He still hasn't answered that with any degree of logic. No he was not willing to provide a trade or replacement... WITHOUT MORE MONEY. Who in their right mind would trust a crook enough to send yet more money when the money they initially spent has gotten no results????

I'm getting tired of this guy's continued rhetoric regarding my wife's kidney infection which is NONE OF HIS BUSINESS. He's never indicated that even if we did provide further documentation (which will be provided for the case, but not to him) that it would have any consequence one way or another. He just wanted to know, and didn't give any reasons why. Wouldn't the fact that there was little communication between those dates, but active communication before and after affirm the "story"?? Who the hell does he think he is to believe that he was the top on everyone's mind at the time. We had her employer, my clients, family, etc. etc. to notify and concern ourselves with. d**k's suits were furthest from our mind. However, she did communicate with him periodically, such as on the 15th (3 days after the expiration of his policy) and at that time he could of said "Sorry, Kim, your beyond my return policy deadline." Did he??? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Nor did he on the 23rd, or the 24th. He just acknowledged and said "I'll be watching."

I cannot believe how full of himself he is, and it's ALMOST impressive how he turns his own dishonesty around to make it appear that he is the victim. Awwwwwwwwwwwww.. Poor Mr. Mattleson.. he got nearly $500 of my wife's money.. My heart bleeds for him.

Yes, his feedback does speak for itself.. 4 negatives. My wife has over 80 positives in half the time it took him to get his. If he's such a prominent businessman, where is all the feedback??

Nothing he says makes an ounce of sense to anyone. He claims he received parcels all the time for alterations, and therefore does not refuse shipment. Well, if that is infact true, why did he encourage a customer to send back merchandise, and acknowledge such, knowing it wasn't an alteration, that the customer wanted a refund?? He KNEW long before the package even got there why it was being sent, and what the expectations were. He's not fooling anyone but himself. It's clear to anyone with an ounce of common sense that he lured my wife into sending the package back knowing full well he would play his games when the parcel arrived to him.

He keeps touting his affiliations (much like he did in nearly every e-mail to me) and whining about harrassment, but he has yet to address any of the allegations against him. He hasn't explained why there is no record of any business under his name in his homestate. He hasn't explained why his e-bay account says "Hartford, CT" and his Yahoo account says "New York, NY." He hasn't explained why the business address and phone number he used is registered to a "C. Holcomb." He hasn't legitimately explained why he told Kim she could send back the merchandise knowing full well he was going to play games (rather, he keeps saying "I never refuse parcels".) He hasn't given any proof to any of these long-standing prominent clients he has. He hasn't defended the allegations that his former victim has a similar story to ours. He hasn't denied that he is still trying to lure people off of e-bay. He's using evasive, distortion tacticts to avoid responsibility for his FRAUDULENT actions.

How can it be harrassment if everything I've said on the websites is true?? Is it not true that you currently have both merchandise that was purchased, as well as nearly $500 of money that doesn't belong to you? Is it not true that you provided false information and misrepresented yourself as a business when you really are not? If anything I've said is not true, then prove it.

To address his comment regarding how I supposedly told him he's not to have further contact with my wife, that is absolutely false. I told him in the beginning that I would be handling the matter, but then two days later told him my attorney told me I was in no position to do so, as the transaction transpired between him and Kim. I told him to contact Kim on several occasions, and he hasn't.

Why would a private investigator want to contact you for information??? You'd provide accurate information?? Yeah right. That's the whole purpose of an investigator. Besides, his focus is on your background for court purposes, such as serving information. So far, there is no DBA in your county, no business licenses in the state. About the only record the state has is "Active information" on the DMV file. If you don't have a business, you're in serious trouble... and I mean SERIOUS trouble. Let me clarify the definition of a legal business entity (you're the same person who holds their own legal proceedings, and are a self-proclaimed attorney and judge).. A business entity would be defined as a sole prop., partnership, Corporation, LLC, or other various forms of REGISTERED business classifications. You indicated in one of your recent e-mails that the transaction took place "under my own, DBA d**k Mattleson." That leads me to believe that you are now a self-proclaimed business. Since there is NO DBA d**k Mattleson in your county, that information was also false (not much to my surprise.) Kim purchased these suits believing that you were a business (because that's what you said) and never would of done so had she known you were just an individual ripoff artist.

Am I the only one amazed by how Mr. Mattleson turns himself into a lawyer and judge with a snap of the fingers?? He states how a policy can be changed, but leaves out interpretation and common sense. He "decides" to withold everything (how convenient) because he's allegedly being harrassed by someone who isn't even a customer of his. I only wish I had the power of Mr. Mattleson.

In response to your "Auction interference" claim.. What WOULD be the righteous thing to do, d**k?? Allow you to keep Kim's merchandise and money, and rely on a credit card investigation and your lies? I told you the action would end as soon as you provided a refund, and you continued to play yourself off as an arrogant victim. You may think you're above any law outside of your "policies", but I am telling you that you are not above being exposed for what you did. Like I said, no mistruths have been given, and if you believe there has been, prove it. That's fair, right?? Maybe it's not your fault.. maybe you really do believe you have done nothing wrong, and the merchandise sitting in your basement, and the money in your bank account really is yours. There are people like that.

I've read d**k's last rebuttal, and it appears that the tone has changed, and that he might be interested in settling this.

I must talk to Kim first, as the decision is hers, but I am proposing that Mr. Mattleson provide a refund, and in exchange we would do the following:

* Provide documentation supporting the shipping delay to satisfy any curiousities.

* Remove any and all websites.

* Transfer the domain name of dickmattleson.com to Mr. Mattleson.

* Provide a signed, and certified letter from both Kim and I indicating no further action will be taken, and no further bidder contact will transpire.

* Provide a relief letter for Mr. Mattleson for the purposes of credit card dispute investigations, as well as PayPal.

* All other action will be canceled, and no further action will take place.

The domain name could/would be placed in an online Escrow, and upon payment, would be automatically transfered to Mr. Mattleson.

I believe this is a fair proposal that benefits all parties involved. It is the easiest way to rid both parties of eachother, and put this all behind us. I don't see any other fair way to settle this side from mediation and/or small claims court. Kim has 2 weeks vacation in May, and it would be a shame to spend it in court. Hopefully this proposal will be accepted by all parties.

In good faith, I have temporarily removed the website (dickmattleson.tophonors.com) parked the domain, and am not going to contact Mr. Mattleson's bidders until a decision is made on this proposed settlement. No further action will take place for a period of three days.

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #4791.
It was sent by d**k Mattleson at [email protected].

The Crooked Suitman d**k Mattleson rip-off auction on e-bay *REBUTTALs (#4791)

They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report:

Their email: [email protected]
Their name: d**k Mattleson
Their phone number: 860/233/1819
Their relationship to the company: Owner

Rebuttal:
In response to this CUSTOMER'S most recent APRIL 1st, 2001 comments:

SELLER has reviewed all the input of this CUSTOMER through e-mails, and AUCTION INTERFERENCE. SELLER has reviewed the final comments through THE RIPOFF REPORT.

At this time the SELLER has nothing new to add.

SELLER has the shipment set aside in a safe place. Moneys of this CUSTOMER are also set aside in a holding pattern, not spent.

SELLER is seeking questions answered related to the time and dates of this transaction to review the validity of the refund request. This CUSTOMER can supply this overview information directly to the SELLER for evaluation and decision or this requested information could be forwarded to a third party, agency, or intermediary for the SELLER'S final review of this
CUSTOMER'S answers. To this date SELLER was unsuccessful in obtaining information from this CUSTOMER related to the delay of the merchandise.

In the opinion of the SELLER, this CUSTOMER has been rude, disrespectful and difficult to deal with. SELLER makes this claim from reading the e-mail messages in a language showing uncooperative attitude on the part of this CUSTOMER.

SELLER has set a 90-day rule, unless this CUSTOMER objects, to formally dispute this transaction. SELLER hereby gives notice that if NO communication is heard from this CUSTOMER by JUNE 15th, 2001, in the form of a CREDIT CARD INVESTIGATION, PAYPAL inquiry, BETTER BUSINES BUREAU mediation, EBAY dispute filing, or other 3rd party mediation intervention removed from websites, please , then the transaction is final. SELLER will then relist contents of suits, shirts, and silk neckties for sale.

SELLER is seeking an actual formal dispute filing rather than plans to file. SELLER is supplying his name, address, and telephone number for this convenience. Should this CUSTOMER need information relative to filing a formal dispute, my door is wide open. SELLER will answer any questions related to his business practices at any time.

SELLER is setting a 90-day rule of June 15th, 2001, Friday for this CUSTOMER to file any formal disputes or forever hold peace. The merchandise and moneys will be in a holding pattern, intact and safe, until June 15th, 2001.

d**k Mattleson
80 Tremont Street
Hartford, Connecticut
06105-3069

[email protected]

860/233/1819

It just occurred to me... Does d**k Mattleson even have the suits anymore?? I'd say it's more than possible that he resold the suits, and neither has the money or the merchandise anymore. It wouldn't surprise me a bit, and it certainly makes sense. An honest businessman would of refunded the money as promised.

I had to laugh after (actually, while) I was reading d**k's rebuttal. Obviously, you can see why my wife fell for his smooth talk and do business with him in the first place.

I'll address each of his points:

He "lists" significantly less than 100 items for week, but if you check his auctions (http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewListedItems&userid=dmatt89&completed=0&sort=0&since=-1 you'll see that if he gets one customer a week that actually meets his reserve, he's lucky. Of course, this doesn't take into consideration the people he sweet-talks into doing business with him offline so he can circumvent e-bay fees, and take away the buyer protection from the consumer.

d**k is still going on and on about his policy, which we never disputed in the first place. Our point since we returned the merchandise is that he waived his policy, and agreed to, and accepted a return. She sent the merchandise back to him the week of 2/21/01 and d**k himself responded to an e-mail after she supplied him with the tracking number saying "I should receive it Monday, I'll be watching" then proceeded to thank her for keeping him informed. d**k is trying to be smooth touting his policy, but what he seems to overlook is the flaw in his elaborate scheme--COMMON SENSE. Why would someone, who is familiar with his policy, send back an item knowing they're not going to get a refund or return, unless the merchant agreed to take it back for a refund??? It makes no sense, and he can't seem to explain his way out of that one.

As for my wife's kidney infection, I never told him she was ill only from 2/20/01 - 2/24/01. She was hospitalized and under doctor's care for several weeks. After receiving that information, he proceeded to ask very invasive, and just plain weird questions such as:

"This might make things easier for me to understand better:

1. When did your wife first learn of her urinary tract infection i.e. when did the pain first start?

2. What date did she check into the hospital?

3. What date did she check out of the hospital?

4. Was your wife only under the care of the Doctor in the note
forwarded to me from the Clinic?, or was your wife under the care of other doctors over 2, 3, 4 weeks? I'm trying to understand when treatment began and finished. I may have other questions in trying to learn what happened from a historical viewpoint, but for now these 4 questions will be a start. "

You believe this guy??? I really don't think he is mentally balanced. At any rate, I explained to him that this was none of his concern, and if he wanted such information, he should contact her directly. I also explained it was irrelevant, because he agreed to the return and accepted it anyways, so what difference does it make why it was late?

He keeps referring to me as "this customer", but as I've told him time and again, this transaction took place between him and my wife. My name is neither on her credit card or her paypal account. He doesn't seem to understand I have no legal relevance to this transaction. My interest in this case is nothing more than a husband who is upset about his wife being taken advantage of by a low-life ripoff/con artist. Yes, I admit I am contacting his bidders and providing them with the details of this case. I feel I have an obligation to other users, and if I can prevent him from bestowing his dishonesty upon others, then I will be satisfied. It is, however, a lie that I threatened him with more auction interference should he not provide a cash refund. I told him if he did the honest thing by my wife, I would end my action. The reason the websites contain his "personal name" is because he "claims" that this is his business name (DBA d**k Mattleson.) What am I supposed to do, say "Watch out for all people selling suits??"

He refused from the beginning to do anything (including sending the suits back or providing an exchange) without yet MORE money in the form of shipping, HANDLING, etc. I explained to him he's trusted about as far as he could be thrown, and that transferring more money to him would be a huge mistake. I've told him time and again to settle this with my wife, and since he accepted the return, she has received absolutely NO e-mail communication from the crook. I told him yesterday to send the original suits back, COD for ACTUAL shipping, and this is what he said:

"I will not be shipping anything to you at this time due to the
HATE/HARASSING activity you are carrying on. I am being harmed and defamed. If you feel that this transaction was not done righteously, please dispute the transaction through PAYPAL, EBAY or your CREDIT CARD company. I am ready to forward my BRIEF with supporting evidence."

He ONCE AGAIN refused to do anything, and once again used his "dumb as they come" logic. Now he believes he's a judge and can hold a court case in his living room and compensate himself for allegedly being defamed. I explained to him once again that the transaction was between my wife and him, and he has no legal right to take my actions out on her. He just doesn't get it at all. I told him if he feels he's being defamed to file a defamation suit.

On a final note, I would like to point out a few things:

1.) There is absolutely no record of a business for him in Connecticut.

2.) The address and phone number he used as his "business" come back to a "C Holcomb" in a residential dwelling.

3.) His ebay account states he is from "Hartford, Connecticut" and his Yahoo auctions account says he is in "New York, NY" (Look him up, his ID is Dmatt89 for both sites)

4.) He currently has both my wife's merchandise AND money.

5.) He has 4 negative feedback (one being neuteral). I contacted one of his former victims, and he described a case very similar to ours. Several of his current bidders have responded to me stating he is trying to get them to do business off of e-bay as well, and something doesn't "smell right."

I initiated a background check through a private investigator on d**k for court and IRS purposes, and am awaiting the results. I will post them as I receive more information. I did find out that a small claims suit can be filed in my area, so it's comforting to know my wife would not have to travel to Connecticut to pursue this guy. I hope him and C. C. Holcomb(Who's also illegally holding stolen merchandise) (if they are infact two seperate people) have frequent flier miles. :)

My best guess is, he's a punk kid running an illegal second-hand suit business out of a house that isn't even his. He obviously thinks he's above the law, so my theory makes sense. More to come. Http://Dickmattleson.tophonors.com

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #4791.
It was sent by d**k Mattleson at [email protected].

They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report:

Their email: [email protected]
Their name: d**k Mattleson
Their phone number: 860/233/1819
Their relationship to the company: Owner

Rebuttal:
I have been selling men's haberdashery on-line for 5 years now, going on 3 years with EBAY. Every week I list upwards of approximately 100 items for sale including shirts, suits, outerwear and shoes. That works out to be approximately 500 items per month. These items are listed auctions style.
Each and every one of my auctions clearly has my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale posted. The TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale are in easy to understand layman English as I ship merchandise worldwide and some customers do not speak English. I also send a copy of my TERMS and CONDITIONS prior to doing any business with an individual. I inquire to see if they understand my inspection and return policy. Once I am assured that the
customer understands my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale, I then proceed with transacting business.

All my merchandise is shipped subject to the customer's inspection and final approval per my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale. I allow 3 full days for a customer to try on a garment, checking for color, checking for fit, check with others to see if the garment is meeting the needs of the customer. The 3 days is calculated from the time the parcel arrives the customer. If the customer is happy and pleased with the products, fits well, and all is in good order, then the transaction is complete.
However, in the event the products delivered do not meet the requirements of the customers, I allow 5 days, from the original delivery signature, to deposit the merchandise with a return carrier of the customer's choosing. The customer agrees to pay for returning insured shipment. I refund cheerfully if the customer is within guidelines of my TERMS and CONDITIONS
of sale.

If the customer returns the products outside my TERMS and CONDTIONS of sale, then I offer house credit. I do not make cash refunds outside my inspection/return policy i.e. 3 days for inspection/5 days to deposit with a returning carrier. House credit is toward other suits/shirts, which may fit better. Example, a customer inspected a 50 Long but found that perhaps a 52 Long would be better.

On replacements/exchanges outside my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale, I ask the customer pay for shipping and handling.

This customer received the intended merchandise on Feb 8th. The
merchandise was not to the customer's as explained in their Feb 8th message. I then instructed the customer, on Feb 8th, to please return for a cheerful refund. The merchandise was not deposited with a return carrier until Feb 21st, 2001. Beyond my 5 days return policy. I explained that I could not offer a cash refund. I explained that I would provide a trade in or house credit privileges toward better fitting suits/shirts. I proposed once a camelhair overcoat.

This customer explained to me that from Feb 20 through 24th, 2001 she was under a Doctor's care for an illness of Urinary Tract Infection.

This customer paid using a credit card through PAYPAL. I asked this customer, on several occasions, to FILE A DISPUTE with regard to this transaction through his credit card provider, EBAY, and PAYPAL. This customer instead chose to engage in AUCTION INTERFERENCE by creating HATE/HARASSING websites. This customer is currently soliciting my current bidders and customers to ask them to read his created websites in
explaining his transaction story, which is slanted and bias in defaming my business. The websites carry my own personal name in the website address. The customer is threating me more AUCTION INTERFERENCE if I do not make a cash refund.

Disputes, though rare, happen in any business endeavor. I have my BRIEF ready to send to any agency in explaining the transaction backed up with supporting evidence.

Once again, I ask that this customer dispute this transaction through EBAY, PAYPAL, and CREDIT CARD PROVIDER.

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #4791.
It was sent by d**k Mattleson at [email protected].

They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report:

Their email: [email protected]
Their name: d**k Mattleson
Their phone number: 860/233/1819
Their relationship to the company: Owner

Rebuttal:
I have been selling men's haberdashery on-line for 5 years now, going on 3 years with EBAY. Every week I list upwards of approximately 100 items for sale including shirts, suits, outerwear and shoes. That works out to be approximately 500 items per month. These items are listed auctions style.
Each and every one of my auctions clearly has my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale posted. The TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale are in easy to understand layman English as I ship merchandise worldwide and some customers do not speak English. I also send a copy of my TERMS and CONDITIONS prior to doing any business with an individual. I inquire to see if they understand my inspection and return policy. Once I am assured that the
customer understands my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale, I then proceed with transacting business.

All my merchandise is shipped subject to the customer's inspection and final approval per my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale. I allow 3 full days for a customer to try on a garment, checking for color, checking for fit, check with others to see if the garment is meeting the needs of the customer. The 3 days is calculated from the time the parcel arrives the customer. If the customer is happy and pleased with the products, fits well, and all is in good order, then the transaction is complete.
However, in the event the products delivered do not meet the requirements of the customers, I allow 5 days, from the original delivery signature, to deposit the merchandise with a return carrier of the customer's choosing. The customer agrees to pay for returning insured shipment. I refund cheerfully if the customer is within guidelines of my TERMS and CONDITIONS
of sale.

If the customer returns the products outside my TERMS and CONDTIONS of sale, then I offer house credit. I do not make cash refunds outside my inspection/return policy i.e. 3 days for inspection/5 days to deposit with a returning carrier. House credit is toward other suits/shirts, which may fit better. Example, a customer inspected a 50 Long but found that perhaps a 52 Long would be better.

On replacements/exchanges outside my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale, I ask the customer pay for shipping and handling.

This customer received the intended merchandise on Feb 8th. The
merchandise was not to the customer's as explained in their Feb 8th message. I then instructed the customer, on Feb 8th, to please return for a cheerful refund. The merchandise was not deposited with a return carrier until Feb 21st, 2001. Beyond my 5 days return policy. I explained that I could not offer a cash refund. I explained that I would provide a trade in or house credit privileges toward better fitting suits/shirts. I proposed once a camelhair overcoat.

This customer explained to me that from Feb 20 through 24th, 2001 she was under a Doctor's care for an illness of Urinary Tract Infection.

This customer paid using a credit card through PAYPAL. I asked this customer, on several occasions, to FILE A DISPUTE with regard to this transaction through his credit card provider, EBAY, and PAYPAL. This customer instead chose to engage in AUCTION INTERFERENCE by creating HATE/HARASSING websites. This customer is currently soliciting my current bidders and customers to ask them to read his created websites in
explaining his transaction story, which is slanted and bias in defaming my business. The websites carry my own personal name in the website address. The customer is threating me more AUCTION INTERFERENCE if I do not make a cash refund.

Disputes, though rare, happen in any business endeavor. I have my BRIEF ready to send to any agency in explaining the transaction backed up with supporting evidence.

Once again, I ask that this customer dispute this transaction through EBAY, PAYPAL, and CREDIT CARD PROVIDER.

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #4791.
It was sent by d**k Mattleson at [email protected].

They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report:

Their email: [email protected]
Their name: d**k Mattleson
Their phone number: 860/233/1819
Their relationship to the company: Owner

Rebuttal:
I have been selling men's haberdashery on-line for 5 years now, going on 3 years with EBAY. Every week I list upwards of approximately 100 items for sale including shirts, suits, outerwear and shoes. That works out to be approximately 500 items per month. These items are listed auctions style.
Each and every one of my auctions clearly has my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale posted. The TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale are in easy to understand layman English as I ship merchandise worldwide and some customers do not speak English. I also send a copy of my TERMS and CONDITIONS prior to doing any business with an individual. I inquire to see if they understand my inspection and return policy. Once I am assured that the
customer understands my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale, I then proceed with transacting business.

All my merchandise is shipped subject to the customer's inspection and final approval per my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale. I allow 3 full days for a customer to try on a garment, checking for color, checking for fit, check with others to see if the garment is meeting the needs of the customer. The 3 days is calculated from the time the parcel arrives the customer. If the customer is happy and pleased with the products, fits well, and all is in good order, then the transaction is complete.
However, in the event the products delivered do not meet the requirements of the customers, I allow 5 days, from the original delivery signature, to deposit the merchandise with a return carrier of the customer's choosing. The customer agrees to pay for returning insured shipment. I refund cheerfully if the customer is within guidelines of my TERMS and CONDITIONS
of sale.

If the customer returns the products outside my TERMS and CONDTIONS of sale, then I offer house credit. I do not make cash refunds outside my inspection/return policy i.e. 3 days for inspection/5 days to deposit with a returning carrier. House credit is toward other suits/shirts, which may fit better. Example, a customer inspected a 50 Long but found that perhaps a 52 Long would be better.

On replacements/exchanges outside my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale, I ask the customer pay for shipping and handling.

This customer received the intended merchandise on Feb 8th. The
merchandise was not to the customer's as explained in their Feb 8th message. I then instructed the customer, on Feb 8th, to please return for a cheerful refund. The merchandise was not deposited with a return carrier until Feb 21st, 2001. Beyond my 5 days return policy. I explained that I could not offer a cash refund. I explained that I would provide a trade in or house credit privileges toward better fitting suits/shirts. I proposed once a camelhair overcoat.

This customer explained to me that from Feb 20 through 24th, 2001 she was under a Doctor's care for an illness of Urinary Tract Infection.

This customer paid using a credit card through PAYPAL. I asked this customer, on several occasions, to FILE A DISPUTE with regard to this transaction through his credit card provider, EBAY, and PAYPAL. This customer instead chose to engage in AUCTION INTERFERENCE by creating HATE/HARASSING websites. This customer is currently soliciting my current bidders and customers to ask them to read his created websites in
explaining his transaction story, which is slanted and bias in defaming my business. The websites carry my own personal name in the website address. The customer is threating me more AUCTION INTERFERENCE if I do not make a cash refund.

Disputes, though rare, happen in any business endeavor. I have my BRIEF ready to send to any agency in explaining the transaction backed up with supporting evidence.

Once again, I ask that this customer dispute this transaction through EBAY, PAYPAL, and CREDIT CARD PROVIDER.

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #4791.
It was sent by d**k Mattleson at [email protected].

They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report:

Their email: [email protected]
Their name: d**k Mattleson
Their phone number: 860/233/1819
Their relationship to the company: Owner

Rebuttal:
I have been selling men's haberdashery on-line for 5 years now, going on 3 years with EBAY. Every week I list upwards of approximately 100 items for sale including shirts, suits, outerwear and shoes. That works out to be approximately 500 items per month. These items are listed auctions style.
Each and every one of my auctions clearly has my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale posted. The TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale are in easy to understand layman English as I ship merchandise worldwide and some customers do not speak English. I also send a copy of my TERMS and CONDITIONS prior to doing any business with an individual. I inquire to see if they understand my inspection and return policy. Once I am assured that the
customer understands my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale, I then proceed with transacting business.

All my merchandise is shipped subject to the customer's inspection and final approval per my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale. I allow 3 full days for a customer to try on a garment, checking for color, checking for fit, check with others to see if the garment is meeting the needs of the customer. The 3 days is calculated from the time the parcel arrives the customer. If the customer is happy and pleased with the products, fits well, and all is in good order, then the transaction is complete.
However, in the event the products delivered do not meet the requirements of the customers, I allow 5 days, from the original delivery signature, to deposit the merchandise with a return carrier of the customer's choosing. The customer agrees to pay for returning insured shipment. I refund cheerfully if the customer is within guidelines of my TERMS and CONDITIONS
of sale.

If the customer returns the products outside my TERMS and CONDTIONS of sale, then I offer house credit. I do not make cash refunds outside my inspection/return policy i.e. 3 days for inspection/5 days to deposit with a returning carrier. House credit is toward other suits/shirts, which may fit better. Example, a customer inspected a 50 Long but found that perhaps a 52 Long would be better.

On replacements/exchanges outside my TERMS and CONDITIONS of sale, I ask the customer pay for shipping and handling.

This customer received the intended merchandise on Feb 8th. The
merchandise was not to the customer's as explained in their Feb 8th message. I then instructed the customer, on Feb 8th, to please return for a cheerful refund. The merchandise was not deposited with a return carrier until Feb 21st, 2001. Beyond my 5 days return policy. I explained that I could not offer a cash refund. I explained that I would provide a trade in or house credit privileges toward better fitting suits/shirts. I proposed once a camelhair overcoat.

This customer explained to me that from Feb 20 through 24th, 2001 she was under a Doctor's care for an illness of Urinary Tract Infection.

This customer paid using a credit card through PAYPAL. I asked this customer, on several occasions, to FILE A DISPUTE with regard to this transaction through his credit card provider, EBAY, and PAYPAL. This customer instead chose to engage in AUCTION INTERFERENCE by creating HATE/HARASSING websites. This customer is currently soliciting my current bidders and customers to ask them to read his created websites in
explaining his transaction story, which is slanted and bias in defaming my business. The websites carry my own personal name in the website address. The customer is threating me more AUCTION INTERFERENCE if I do not make a cash refund.

Disputes, though rare, happen in any business endeavor. I have my BRIEF ready to send to any agency in explaining the transaction backed up with supporting evidence.

Once again, I ask that this customer dispute this transaction through EBAY, PAYPAL, and CREDIT CARD PROVIDER.

Where to begin? Around the end of January my wife thought it would be a nice gesture to purchase some suits for me for the then upcoming valentines day. She came across some of Mr. Mattleson's auctions, which, at the time, looked promising. She placed a bid on his auction, and was shortly contacted by Mr. Mattleson and asked if she would like to deal off of e-bay, and in return, he would provide a discount. She reluctantly did so (a mistake we would both soon regret) and after giving measurements, making payments, the suits finally arrived on Feb 8, 2001. The suits did not come close to fitting (Mr. Mattleson claimed he had alteration skills.) She sent him an e-mail stating the suits did not fit. He replied shortly thereafter and indicated he felt that is the reason why an inspection/return policy is important. His return policy was 5 days (somewhat unreasonable for people with busy lives), however, my wife was not able to meet this deadline due to an illness. On 2/15/01 (2 days after his deadline) she sent him an e-mail indicating that she had made out the address labels and planned on returning the item. He responded and acknowledged her e-mail. Shortly thereafter, she was admitted to the hospital, and returning the package moved to the back burner on the list of priorities. On 2/22/01 she mailed the package, and on 2/24/01 she sent Mr. Mattleson an e-mail stating the package should arrive shortly. He replied and stated "I will probably receive it Monday" and "I'll be watching." As expected, that Monday (2/27/01) he received, and accepted the package. That same day he sent an e-mail stating that he "would not be able to provide a refund" as we were outside of his return policy. He then demanded yet more money to return the package. I, at that point, intervened and asked why he would tell someone to return a package, acknowledge it's transit, then accept, and sign for the package 1 business day later. His response?? "I normally check records when parcels are received. I get e-mails from clients around the world indicating they are shipping to me. I acknowledge and watch---then check records when the parcel arrives." This type of response blew me away, to say the least. I then questioned if this was really a way to conduct business. I asked why an upstanding businessman (as he claimed to be) with prominent attorneys, sitting judges, pilots, and bankers as clients, would converse with a customer, tell them to return a package (even after the alleged deadline), tell them "I'll be watching", then physically sign for, and accept a package, then refuse to do anything without more money. His response? "All carriers regularly leave packages with me. I never give any carrier instructions to refuse a shipment. I check records after receiving parcels and follow up accordingly." I then presented to him the following scenario: Say someone writes off 10,000 on their taxes, gets audited, then tells the auditor "Well, I didn't go through my receipts to make sure I could make those write-offs." I asked what he thought the IRS would say... My guess? After laughing hysterically, they would probably say "Sorry, d**k, it doesn't work that way." Of course his record-keeping procedures are his business, but his poor business skills should not be our responsibility.

I then began to research his background somewhat, and not much to my surprise, I discovered that there are no business licenses issued under his name. I also discovered that the address and phone number he listed as his business belong to another person. I recently started checking other sites to see if he is registered, and discovered that on Yahoo! Auctions, his ID: Dmatt89 claims that he is from "New York, NY" while his e-bay ID claims he is in Hartford Connecticut. Very strange, and to be honest, nothing seems legitimate about this guy. I confronted him about his business name and he indicated that our transaction was done through his own name "DBA d**k Mattleson." (I hope he is being honest with the IRS, and not trying to circumvent taxes, like he does E-bay fees.)

To make an even longer story short, we are left with no merchandise and no money, and are pursuing action to get one or the other back. In the meantime, I would strongly urge people to use extreme caution when dealing with this man. I would HIGHLY recommend not accepting his attractive offers to deal off of e-bay.

It is truly a shame that persons such as this must exist in the online world, realizing consumer's already existing fears of conducting business online. With any luck, maybe this person will be exposed for what he really is, and an end will be put to it all.

Please help get my money back! ([email protected])