<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html> Newton and everyone, On occasion I am called upon to evaluate a privately owned piano for a potential buyer.  I do not like trying to wheedle out of giving the seller information, so I usually let them know when I arrive that since the potential buyer is the one paying me, s/he is the one who should get the information first.  If they wish to share it with the seller, that's up to them. Still, once in a while I will talk to the seller about the condition of the piano if it does not put the buyer at a disadvantage.  You know, some people think their piano is worth $1000 even if it's a 30-year-old spinet that hasn't seen a technician in about that many years and is 150c flat, screw rattles, rusty strings, etc.  Even though they may not be happy about what I have to say, they have an idea why I suggested the buyer not buy, and can decide to either lower their price, get the piano brought up to par, or rip off some other trusting soul.  Seems ethically OK to me.  Agree or disagree? Regards, Clyde Newton Hunt wrote: <blockquote TYPE=CITE>It is my policy not to tell the seller anything about any piano I inspect for a buyer who has hired me for my opinion(s).  If asked by the seller what I think I gently say, "Since I am being hired by the buyer it is unethical for me to tell you of my observations."</blockquote> </html>