I can't speak to the veracity of Frank's claims, or to Daddy G's integrity, as I do not know either party and have not heard both sides of what has transpired between the two. I can tell you, though, that this instance suggests the need for some sort of vetting, feedback, or peer review mechanism on this forum, to which those who wish to wish to conduct business here should be subject as a condition of doing so.
Very recently, I too made a purchase from someone on this forum who purports to serve the motorcycling community, and this one. I paid for the item up front and in full, in good faith, but have yet to receive it. In my case, the problem may well be incompetence on the part of the carrier, but as I speak, I am out the purchase price, and have nothing but a label number and no recourse with which to file a claim against the carrier. Only the merchant can do that, but to date, I have been thoroughly unimpressed by the manner in which this situation is (not) being addressed. For my part, I am forced to hope that the merchant "does the right thing", specifically, produce the item by a reliable means of conveyance, and then make a claim against the carrier who lost the item, or write it off as a loss/insurance claim. To do so is merely basic business ethics, and common decency. He has my money. I have nothing to show for it. I just want what I paid for, and what he agreed to provide... nothing more, nothing less.
In light of these sorts of occurrences, I'd suggest that perhaps Travis could consider developing and implementing a way in which those who wish to advertise goods and services here be required to be subject to community feedback or some similar means of peer review as a condition of purveying goods and services on this forum, perhaps in the manner that Ebay offers a customer-based quality assessment. Unless sellers here are subject to some sort of reputation assessment, we can expect more of this to occur. I was of the impression that we all, as a matter of course, look after one another here, especially in matters of personal honor. This is apparently not the case. I'm not one to slander or defame, but I, for one, would be happy for some sort of objective, anonymous customer feedback mechanism at this particular time.
TC