AITA for Not Refunding Buyer of Misrepresented iMac?

A 2011 iMac listing turned into a full-on Mercari refund war, and somehow it all started with a curbside pickup and one video of a screen turning on. OP paid $200, saw the listing claim, confirmed it could be used as a display, and sent the buyer everything they could, including the serial number and specs.

The twist is, the buyer wanted it for design work and got stuck on the fact that the machine could not be updated to a newer OS. They say OP “sold trash” because it was older than advertised and they did not get the chance to test it properly before buying, even though OP only had video proof it powered on and included the serial details.

Now OP is stuck wondering if “I sold it exactly what I paid” is not enough when the buyer’s expectations were way more specific than the listing.

Original Post

I bought an old iMac off Mercari that was listed as 2011. I googled and it said that a 2011 model could be used as a display.

It came in, worked, got distracted and forgot to test it out more. I couldn't figure out how to do a factory reset, wasn't sure if it was possible, and I looked up the serial # and it is definitely older than 2011, and I couldn't find an exact year.

I'm not tech savvy so I sold it for exactly what I paid ($200). I included the serial number and all the specs though and said I didn't know the year, which is true.

The person who bought it is now saying they want a refund because they told me it is to be used for design work and they can't update it to a newer IOS. They said if it wasn't for a pandemic, they would have come inside, tested out all the features and not bought it.

I had only sent a video showing it turns on perfectly, which it does, then did a curbside pickup. I was honestly confused why they wanted an older iMac, and I actually had a bunch of interest on it, but they said they needed it.

Now they said I screwed them over by selling a faulty computer when I knew they did design work and I should give a refund, especially since they don't have Apple Care for it. Am I the a*****e?

Edit: I just got a follow up message that I sold them trash and didn't properly check for malfunctions and refuse to offer a refund. I said the iMac was old and I didn't know the exact year, but provided the serial number.

I don't understand how now the computer is considered malfunctioning. The complaint is I should have tested that it can't be updated to a newer OS, but that was never asked in purchasing.

I gave the serial number, said it was iMac 7,1, intel core 2 duo, 2.4 GHz and 3gb.

Consumer Protection Insights

Consumer rights advocate Ed Mierzwinski emphasizes the importance of transparency in online sales.

In this case, the seller might have benefited from including explicit information about the iMac's limitations, especially regarding software compatibility.

Comment from u/wooter99

Comment from u/Nocturnal_Loon

Comment from u/Phy44

Comment from u/KatFrog

Comment from u/Thebuch4

Comment from u/court_in_the_middle

OP thought they were doing the bare minimum right, they provided the serial number and specs and even admitted they did not know the exact year.

The buyer, meanwhile, is framing the iMac as unusable for design work because they cannot update it to a newer OS.

Legal expert Nolo indicates that refund policies should be clearly stated in any listing to avoid disputes. Sellers are encouraged to outline their terms explicitly, including conditions under which refunds are possible. Nolo recommends that sellers adopt best practices by researching and implementing standard refund policies to protect themselves and their buyers.

Also, this feels like the coworker who didn’t make the Pi Day pie because it wasn’t on the original poll, even though everyone argued about it.

Comment from u/t3hd0n

Comment from u/Cyrinne

Comment from u/aMiserable_creature

This is where the story gets messy, OP says the “malfunction” complaint is really about software limits they never agreed to test for.

Technology Transparency

Tech reviewer David Katzmaier emphasizes the importance of accuracy in product representations, especially in the electronics market.

Comment from u/Lyra-Vega

Comment from u/[deleted]

Comment from u/[deleted]

And after OP got the follow-up message calling the computer trash, the whole dispute turns into a question of who should have caught what before the curbside pickup.</p>

Building Trust in Online Transactions

microsourcing.com'>Mark DeMaree, an e-commerce expert.

What are your thoughts on this situation? Share your perspective in the comments below.

This case brings to light the prevalent issue of buyer's remorse in online transactions, particularly when it involves electronics like the iMac in question. The buyer's distress appears to be linked to their dependence on the device for essential design work, making it all the more challenging when the product fails to fulfill their requirements. This emotional response is understandable, as the stakes can be high for individuals relying on technology for their livelihood. Conversely, the seller's apparent lack of technical expertise may have resulted in a misrepresentation of the iMac. The nuances of this transaction serve as a reminder of the importance of accurate product descriptions and the potential consequences of oversight in the fast-paced world of online selling.

In the case of the iMac sale on Mercari, it becomes evident that the complexities of online sales extend beyond mere transactions. Misunderstandings like this can easily escalate into disputes, highlighting the necessity for sellers to maintain transparency in their listings.

As consumer expectations shift in the digital marketplace, it is crucial for sellers to prioritize honesty to build trust with potential buyers. This incident serves as a reminder that misrepresentations can lead not only to disputes but also to a loss of reputation. By adhering to best practices in product descriptions and embracing a culture of reliability, sellers can navigate the online marketplace more effectively and foster long-term customer loyalty.

OP might not be the villain, but this buyer is not letting go of the “it was supposed to be updatable” storyline.

Want another “stay neutral or get pressured” mess? See how OP dealt with her parents’ divorce guilt-tripping in Caught in the Middle: Refusing to Take Sides in Parents Divorce.