Memory Lane sold cards they didn't have per SCD

[Powell]

Memory Lane is in a tough spot and doesn’t want to do anything to jeopardize their insurance. My personal opinion is to support Memory Lane and unite against the thief.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by calvindog

If the choice was to follow what your insurance company told you to do or else they wouldn’t cover a penny of the loss, or do it your own way, not have the auction, and lose $2 million, what would you do?

That would be “interesting” insurance policy language if it required a fake auction to establish value or the recovery would be zero. If the items are covered there would be many alternatives to determine value that wouldn’t involve wasting customer time.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Carter08

That would be “interesting” insurance policy language if it required a fake auction to establish value or the recovery would be zero. If the items are covered there would be many alternatives to determine value that wouldn’t involve wasting customer time.

+1. I find it extremely difficult to believe the insurance policy requires a fake and fraudulent auction following a theft. Can anyone show an insurance policy like this? Please !

[Lorewalker]

It seems to me that liability would be with the hotel, who had to have agreed to hold the package while they waited for ML to check in a few days later. I feel it was poor judgement, at best by those at ML, who decided it was a good idea to do this. I doubt the hotel had the means to adequately protect the contents of the box.

I simply do not see a scenario where ML's ins carrier would cover the loss. It was delivered and signed for and it was delivered to someone who was not an agent of the company. Seems like an easy denial.

And although it is entirely at the bidders expense, letting the auction go seems to be the best approach to making sure you have a value on the loss. Hopefully the auction was run clean and there was no shill bidding on those lots.

Nobody wins here but this was easily avoidable.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by G1911

+1. I find it extremely difficult to believe the insurance policy requires a fake and fraudulent auction following a theft. Can anyone show an insurance policy like this? Please !

+2

If insurance companies did this, pretty soon reputable AHs will start advertising their auctions as "Guaranteed Phantom-Free"

[Snowman]

All collectibles insurance policies have caps on the amount they will pay out for a claim for items shipped via FedEx et al. These limits are relatively low with respect to one's overall policy coverage limits. It's also why other auction houses use armored trucks to deliver high valued packages. I'd be surprised if ML is in fact covered should they indeed have to file the claim.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

All collectibles insurance policies have caps on the amount they will pay out for a claim for items shipped via FedEx et al. These limits are relatively low with respect to one's overall policy coverage limits. It's also why other auction houses use armored trucks to deliver high valued packages. I'd be surprised if ML is in fact covered should they indeed have to file the claim.

Fed Ex did not lose the package. The question is coverage under an "away from premises" provision such as in the policy Lorewalker posted. Without knowing the policy language, or the course of dealings between the parties, we can only speculate. It may be that one or more posters here actually know.

[nolemmings]

Three issues pop out to me: 1) who is responsible/liable for the loss, i.e. which insurance policy(ies) is/are in play; 2) what is the extent of coverage under the policies-- not so much monetary amounts but the extent that exclusions apply; and, 3) what is the amount of monetary damage.

As for the last of these, it seems reasonable to have conducted the auction to establish current value, especially if many of the cards had not been in the market recently. I highly doubt any insurance company insisted on this format because value could be established in other ways. Rather it was in ML's best interest, as well as those who would receive compensation, to have the most recent pricing data available for the insurance claim. And it is just that-- a claim-- which the insurance companies can and (gasp) do dispute. They will no doubt investigate the bidding to look for irregularities or other signs of skullduggery, but assuming all went forward on the up and up, the final hammer prices are excellent evidence of value.

[notfast]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

It seems to me that liability would be with the hotel, who had to have agreed to hold the package while they waited for ML to check in a few days later. I feel it was poor judgement, at best by those at ML, who decided it was a good idea to do this. I doubt the hotel had the means to adequately protect the contents of the box.

I simply do not see a scenario where ML's ins carrier would cover the loss. It was delivered and signed for and it was delivered to someone who was not an agent of the company. Seems like an easy denial.

And although it is entirely at the bidders expense, letting the auction go seems to be the best approach to making sure you have a value on the loss. Hopefully the auction was run clean and there was no shill bidding on those lots.

Nobody wins here but this was easily avoidable.

I’m sure the hotel also has some terms limiting their liability in situations like this. Probably agree to them when booking a room.

[Leon]

One word of caution in this thread. The standard rule is going to apply. It's right above on every page. Be prepared to put your name or edit your post if it doesn't conform. Or you can edit out your comment, if you don't want to put your name next to it.

If you fail to, it will be edited and/or your name will be put under your id. Thanks for everyone's understanding.

If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it.


.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Fed Ex did not lose the package. The question is coverage under an "away from premises" provision such as in the policy Lorewalker posted. Without knowing the policy language, or the course of dealings between the parties, we can only speculate. It may be that one or more posters here actually know.

I would have to believe they carry "away from premises" coverage via a rider of some kind. They are displaying their upcoming offerings throughout the country from time to time, and there are a variety of scenarios that could lead to a claim; e.g., theft, damage by movers/handlers or casualty, etc. As you said, the extent of that coverage is unknown to us, as is the issue of whether there are multiple policies involved.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by calvindog

As soon as I find a lawyer to offer his opinion I’ll let you know.

Best post in a long time.

[steve B]

I would expect to see some of these being cracked out and sent for grading.
Slowly, and through different companies if they're smart, all at once and through the same company if they're not.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by jayshum

From the SCD article, ML is not the only one to do something like this:

"If it’s impractical to drive to a remote location for a show or other event, dealers often ship items ahead of time, tracking shipments and making arrangements to take delivery. One former auction house owner told us Monday that while the process can be nerve wracking, problems are rare."

Perhaps this would be fine if it were a box of 50 of my craptastic cards with a total worth in the very low 4 digit range. Just because shipping in this fashion has been a common practice doesn't mean it makes sense with such a valuable 7 digit box shipment. Memory Lane shouldn't get off with a "oh well, shit happens" pat on the back. They handled this shipment with little foresight, not much more than if it were flowers sent to the mother-in-law for her birthday.

And how honorable is it to let the stolen card lots continue as if the cards were still legitimately being auctioned? At some point before the auction end these lots should have been closed when they hadn't been recovered. As others have mentioned value could have been determined by other methods rather than an integrity challenged phantom auction.

Perhaps out of my financial collecting universe, but I think a common sense perspective...my 2 cents from a guy who owns multiple cards worth 2 cents.


brianp(arker)-beme

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by steve B

I would expect to see some of these being cracked out and sent for grading.
Slowly, and through different companies if they're smart, all at once and through the same company if they're not.

Probably a bit premature but it would be prudent to publish a list with hi-res photos of the stolen cards along with any unique identifiers so TPGs and others in the hobby could keep an eye out for them.

[packs]

I think you’d have to let the auctions run for the benefit of the consignors no? Otherwise what do you pay them? I wouldn’t necessarily want the AH to decide what my card might have sold for.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Perhaps this would be fine if it were a box of 50 of my craptastic cards with a total worth in the very low 4 digit range. Just because shipping in this fashion has been a common practice doesn't mean it makes sense with such a valuable 7 digit box shipment. Memory Lane shouldn't get off with a "oh well, shit happens" pat on the back. They handled this shipment with little foresight, not much more than if it were flowers sent to the mother-in-law for her birthday.

And how honorable is it to let the stolen card lots continue as if the cards were still legitimately being auctioned? At some point before the auction end these lots should have been closed when they hadn't been recovered. As others have mentioned value could have been determined by other methods rather than an integrity challenged phantom auction.

Perhaps out of my financial collecting universe, but I think a common sense perspective...my 2 cents from a guy who owns multiple cards worth 2 cents.


brianp(arker)-beme

I was just pointing out that what ML did was apparently not uncommon according to someone who used to have an auction house. No indication about whether that was true for cards this valuable. Personally, I was shocked to read that an auction house would be shipping that much value in the way described, but if it was cheaper and had always worked before without any problems, I'm not surprised they would keep doing it.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Fed Ex did not lose the package. The question is coverage under an "away from premises" provision such as in the policy Lorewalker posted. Without knowing the policy language, or the course of dealings between the parties, we can only speculate. It may be that one or more posters here actually know.

As evidenced by their policy coverage amounts, insurance companies place relatively large amounts of trust with policy holders themselves, and significantly less trust with mail carriers. If you were the one drafting policies, how much trust would you place, relative to FedEx overnight delivery, in a random rotation of day crew and night shift staffers at a Best Western over the course of multiple days?

I know my answer would be 'less trust' and I suspect yours would be as well.

Without having access to the actual policy itself, the best we can do is speculate and estimate what the likelihood is that an insurance company would actually pay out on such a claim.

Perhaps Jeff has already read the policy and is the one representing them though? Because otherwise, I can't figure out why he'd be so confident that ML is in fact covered should the cards never surface.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by jayshum

I was just pointing out that what ML did was apparently not uncommon according to someone who used to have an auction house. No indication about whether that was true for cards this valuable. Personally, I was shocked to read that an auction house would be shipping that much value in the way described, but if it was cheaper and had always worked before without any problems, I'm not surprised they would keep doing it.

Sorry, I was utilizing your quote of the Sports Collector's Daily article instead of quoting it from the Sports Collector's Daily directly, pretty much out of laziness, and not questioning your viewpoint, which seemed fairly obvious to me. And I can understand why this shipment would happen, because that was how it was handled in the past, just questioning the lack of foresight with such an incredibly large value shipment.

But then again, this parallels how most practices only get changed after something catastrophic occurs. As I learned last semester in my Human Nature 101 class.

brianp(arker)-beme

[Yoda]

Since most auction houses are not capital intensive and the cards are not recovered, ML will probably only have 2 routes to compensate consignors, insurance recovery or sue Best Western for failure to protect the cards once they were in possession of the cards, which they clearly did not. This is a clear responsibility under state's bailee laws. And I agree the limit under the transit portion of their policy would be lower than at the original location. I had nearly 30 years in the insurance industry and that is the normal procedure.
I say all of this because it is a distinct possibility that paying out their own pocket could bankrupt ML.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Is it legal to list things on ebay one doesn't have? I'm sure it's against their rules.

I'm going to a flea market this weekend and I'm "optimistic" I'll soon have a green Cobb available. Can I list it on ebay now?

I really doubt it is against any rules as a there are a ton of eBay sellers who don't own anything they have listed for sale.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

I received a call after Sunday night (a day after auction ended) telling me that a box of cards had been stolen. First, I was assured that I will be paid out 100%, on the final value of the auction, which I have no doubt will happen, whether insurance covers it or not (and I am sure they will). Second, I was told the auction had to continue in order to establish the fair market value of the cards, otherwise, how does anyone establish the value/hammer price. Third, I was told anyone who won a stolen card will be given the option, but not obligation, to buy the card at the hammer price + BP if they are found. Plus, they are optimistic the cards will be found.

A few other things:

1. The cards were stolen, not lost or misplaced. The cards got to their intended destination, were signed for and stored, and then taken. As far as I can tell, ML has done nothing wrong or irresponsible.

2. It sucks for the buyers, but they are out no money, only expectations. They may have missed out on another card, but they are in no worse position than before the auction started. The bigger issue would have been how much do you pay the consignors? Do you guess, do you just settle, do you litigate? Running the auction, which I am sure was done at the advice of both counsel and insurance, to establish value is certainly the best path with the least damage given the crappy situation that’s nobody’s fault. There is no winning answer under these circumstances. It sucks, millions $$ of cards got stolen and ML is on the hook. No bueno all around

3. ML owes me a lot of money. I have complete confidence I will get every dime (and have proactively been assured numerous times of that and I will get paid before insurance ever kicks in). I do not blame ML for this and I think they are doing all the right things under real crappy circumstances. I think it sucks balls for the collecting community bc the cards may be gone from the hobby forever. Hopefully the turn up.

Ryan, I misread your original post. I originally read that you were notified the Sunday after the cards were stolen. I now see that you were notified the Sunday after the auction ended (May 5th). Sorry if my previous responses reflected that incorrect information.

Any concern with the the lag time between when the cards were stolen and when you were notified?

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

All collectibles insurance policies have caps on the amount they will pay out for a claim for items shipped via FedEx et al. These limits are relatively low with respect to one's overall policy coverage limits. It's also why other auction houses use armored trucks to deliver high valued packages. I'd be surprised if ML is in fact covered should they indeed have to file the claim.

That is why there are riders to temporarily increase coverage under a policy for a certain event. And the coverage for what is being shipped will be mandated by the policy.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by notfast

I’m sure the hotel also has some terms limiting their liability in situations like this. Probably agree to them when booking a room.

Yeah I would imagine and they were accepting a package for someone who was not even a guest at the time and not going to be a guest for 3 more days.

Again, to me this keeps coming back to horrible judgement by the auction house. And just because they did it without incident 20 times does not mean they should have ever done it at all.

[BRoberts]

Originally Posted by Powell

Memory Lane is in a tough spot and doesn’t want to do anything to jeopardize their insurance. My personal opinion is to support Memory Lane and unite against the thief.

#United

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Probably a bit premature but it would be prudent to publish a list with hi-res photos of the stolen cards along with any unique identifiers so TPGs and others in the hobby could keep an eye out for them.

I suspect you could go to the recent auction, sort by highest price, and then select the top 50 cards and you'd have a pretty good idea of what was likely stolen.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by jayshum

I was just pointing out that what ML did was apparently not uncommon according to someone who used to have an auction house. No indication about whether that was true for cards this valuable. Personally, I was shocked to read that an auction house would be shipping that much value in the way described, but if it was cheaper and had always worked before without any problems, I'm not surprised they would keep doing it.

Other auction houses use armored trucks to deliver $2 million dollar packages. Probstein regularly posts videos of him getting these on social media. Why would they go through the added inconvenience and expense of using an armored truck if they could have simply just shipped it via FedEx and saved a lot of money?

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I suspect you could go to the recent auction, sort by highest price, and then select the top 50 cards and you'd have a pretty good idea of what was likely stolen.

Or how about this? Since the story was released with their cooperation, they could just let the public know which cards are missing. Huge difference between relying on an assumption if the actual info is available.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Other auction houses use armored trucks to deliver $2 million dollar packages. Probstein regularly posts videos of him getting these on social media. Why would they go through the added inconvenience and expense of using an armored truck if they could have simply just shipped it via FedEx and saved a lot of money?

Just maybe Probstein is putting on a dog and pony show...for social media to...show everyone how awesome he is. VOMIT. Anyway, as I posted above, the insurance policy will dictate the method the insured is required to use based on the value of what is being shipped.

And it is 50 fucking cards. Carry them on the plane with you.

[brianp-beme]

The handling of this situation is just driving me nuts, and these type of things normally don't. I have never had (nor will I in the future) any interaction with this auction house. Mistakes can and will be made, but...

Here is a quote from one of Ryan's prior posts about how Memory Lane informed him how they would handle the following scenario:


Third, I was told anyone who won a stolen card will be given the option, but not obligation, to buy the card at the hammer price + BP if they are found.


Really, they would still be looking to profit from the winners of these stolen cards (who placed their bids with the understandable belief that it was a normal auction for these cards, not a phantom one) if they happen to resurface? Does a real company that has made serious lapses in judgement and caused bidders and consigners such headaches and confusion really have the audacity to handle things in this manner? To still offer the cards with a Buyer's Premium?

Own up to your mistakes and do the right thing! Or else a fair amount of folks, to keep things on baseball terms, will think strike three and you're out.


brianp(arker)-beme (I have already ejected myself from this Auction House's game)

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

The handling of this situation is just driving me nuts, and these type of things normally don't. I have never had (nor will I in the future) any interaction with this auction house. Mistakes can and will be made, but...

Here is a quote from one of Ryan's prior posts about how Memory Lane informed him how they would handle the following scenario:


Third, I was told anyone who won a stolen card will be given the option, but not obligation, to buy the card at the hammer price + BP if they are found.


Really, they would still be looking to profit from the winners of these stolen cards (who placed their bids with the understandable belief that it was a normal auction for these cards, not a phantom one) if they happen to resurface? Does a real company that has made serious lapses in judgement and caused bidders and consigners such headaches and confusion really have the audacity to handle things in this manner? To still offer the cards with a Buyer's Premium?

Own up to your mistakes and do the right thing! Or else a fair amount of folks, to keep things on baseball terms, will think strike three and you're out.


brianp(arker)-beme (I have already ejected myself from this Auction House's game)

We are talking about card collectors. Just give me the card I need and we can look past fraud, wrongdoings, mishaps, excess shipping...oh wait not excess shipping or shipping slowly...

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by Yoda

I say all of this because it is a distinct possibility that paying out their own pocket could bankrupt ML.

I have total confidence that I will get paid in full, as will all other consignors whose cards were stolen -- Memory Lane is no fly by night outfit. I expect ML will lose some money here, but this will not sink the ship and they will continue as one of the best 3-4 sports memorabilia AHs. I also expect they will learn and grow from this, improving procedures going forward.

If/when I do get paid, I will disclose. If issues arise, then I have a forum to post on and I have legal recourse. But again, I believe the odds of needing either of the latter are super low.

For what its worth, I know more than what has been posted here, but its not my job or place to discuss (and none of your business to hear) some of these facts, especially those concerning the investigation. All I will say on the matter is that as someone who is potentially materially impacted, I am very satisfied with how this is being handled so far and I do not blame Memory Lane -- its a shitty scenario all around.

I hope (and frankly expect) that in time Memory Lane will make some announcement on the matter. But I expect that right now they are doing what advisors suggest (counsel, police, insurance, etc) and they are focused more on navigating this crappy situation than satisfying the interests and curiousity of message board posters.

BRIAN -- I dont know if ML will charge a buyer's premium, I assumed they would. The point is that no impacted winning bidder will be bound by their bid in the event the cards resurface -- they will be given the option and not the obligation to buy them (I assume on the terms run in the auction).

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

BRIAN -- I dont know if ML will charge a buyer's premium, I assumed they would. The point is that no impacted winning bidder will be bound by their bid in the event the cards resurface -- they will be given the option and not the obligation to buy them (I assume on the terms run in the auction).

Thanks Ryan for the clarification. I retract my audacity remark (unless of course they would actually tack on that Buyer's Premium).

Brian

[GregC]

The ML rep was coming from the East Coast and the cards were located in California; that is why they were shipped (similar to how high value items are shipped every day).

But the method of transit is also moot, because the items were stolen after they were safely delivered. The package was supposed to be held in a secure place by hotel management.

Memory Lane could have had a California-based employee drive the package to the hotel by Sherman tank or armed convoy, and still, once hotel management was asked to store the package in a secure room, it could/would have been stolen just the same.

[ValKehl]

Here's an aspect I don't recall seeing mentioned thus far. Did Memory Lane notify the hotel in advance of the $ value of the shipment? My guess is NO! If ML did advise the value, I'm guessing that the hotel would have refused to accept any liability for loss or damage to the cards while in its possession. Also, I'm thinking the hotel would have instructed ML to address the package to the hotel's manager, who immediately after signing for the package upon receipt would have placed it in the hotel's safe. And, I'm thinking that the hotel would likely have charged ML for this extra service.

IMHO, it was totally inappropriate, even if not illegal, for ML to continue the auction for these 50 cards because ML knew they were not available to be delivered to the auction winners. IMHO, this is the same as the eBay scenario that someone mentioned. While I fully understand the desire to continue the auction in order to determine values to be paid to the consignors, IMHO, this does not override the total inappropriateness of leaving these cards in the auction.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by GregC

The ML rep was coming from the East Coast and the cards were located in California; that is why they were shipped (similar to how high value items are shipped every day).

But the method of transit is also moot, because the items were stolen after they were safely delivered. The package was supposed to be held in a secure place by hotel management.

Memory Lane could have had a California-based employee drive the package to the hotel by Sherman tank or armed convoy, and still, once hotel management was asked to store the package in a secure room, it could/would have been stolen just the same.

If your summary is true, it was a mistake to trust the management of a Best Western to hold secure millions of dollars worth of anything. You don’t think so?

[Seven]

This entire situation is just terrible. Truly awful people exist in this world that commit acts like this. For the sake of all parties involved, I hope the cards are recovered, but I do not think it's likely.

Ryan, your insight and transparency regarding all of this has been great. People can point fingers until they are blue in the face concerning whose fault it is, but the situation is what it is.

[notfast]

Originally Posted by GregC

. The package was supposed to be held in a secure place by hotel management.

This is the issue for me and obviously others. Stuff of this value shouldn’t have even been in the hands of hotel management/staff.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by GregC

The ML rep was coming from the East Coast and the cards were located in California; that is why they were shipped (similar to how high value items are shipped every day).

But the method of transit is also moot, because the items were stolen after they were safely delivered. The package was supposed to be held in a secure place by hotel management.

Memory Lane could have had a California-based employee drive the package to the hotel by Sherman tank or armed convoy, and still, once hotel management was asked to store the package in a secure room, it could/would have been stolen just the same.

So don't ask hotel "management" to store the package, have it held at Fed Ex for Joe to pick up, or Fed Ex it to Joe and have him fly out with the cards? In any case, obviously hindsight is 20 20 and nobody will do it this way again I assume.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Carter08

If your summary is true, it was a mistake to trust the management of a Best Western to hold secure millions of dollars worth of anything. You don’t think so?

This hotel is a Best Western, not a Middle of the Road Western, Fair to Middling Western, or Just Passable Western hotel, so they should be expected to anticipate and securely warehouse millions of dollars worth of cardboard and plastic, even if hotel management was not notified.

Brian

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

This hotel is a Best Western, not a Middle of the Road Western, Fair to Middling Western, or Just Passable Western hotel, so they should be expected to anticipate and securely warehouse millions of dollars worth of cardboard and plastic, even if hotel management was not notified.

Brian

Best Western PLUS.

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So don't ask hotel "management" to store the package, have it held at Fed Ex for Joe to pick up, or Fed Ex it to Joe and have him fly out with the cards? In any case, obviously hindsight is 20 20 and nobody will do it this way again I assume.

Say it was held at FedEx for Joe to pick up— can't it get stolen there? Happened to me once.

Say Joe brought them in person, kept them in his room. Goes out for a burger. Can't the room safe get burglarized?

Say Joe kept the box on his person at all times. He can get robbed. Then what— the internet says he's dumb for carrying them, why didn't he put them in a safe or ask the hotel to put them in the management's safe.

Like you said, Peter: hindsight is 20/20. People on the internet can Monday Morning QB this thing a billion different ways. But thieves are gonna thief.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Say it was held at FedEx for Joe to pick up— can't it get stolen there? Happened to me once.

Say Joe brought them in person, kept them in his room. Goes out for a burger. Can't the room safe get burglarized?

Say Joe kept the box on his person at all times. He can get robbed. Then what— the internet says he's dumb for carrying them, why didn't he put them in a safe or ask the hotel to put them in the management's safe.

Like you said, Peter: hindsight is 20/20. People on the internet can Monday Morning QB this thing a billion different ways. But thieves are gonna thief.

They could get stolen at the show too. A Fed Ex plane could crash. But the issue is what makes the most sense, not what is foolproof.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Say it was held at FedEx for Joe to pick up— can't it get stolen there? Happened to me once.

Say Joe brought them in person, kept them in his room. Goes out for a burger. Can't the room safe get burglarized?

Say Joe kept the box on his person at all times. He can get robbed. Then what— the internet says he's dumb for carrying them, why didn't he put them in a safe or ask the hotel to put them in the management's safe.

Like you said, Peter: hindsight is 20/20. People on the internet can Monday Morning QB this thing a billion different ways. But thieves are gonna thief.

In a perfect world we should be able to expect to not get robbed but that is why there are safes, vaults, safe deposit boxes, alarms, etc. At the end of the day, it is the person(s) who is/are in possession of the valuables to take the appropriate steps to safeguard them at all times.

I cannot see how sending the box, which could have been carried on a flight, to a Best Western in the middle of nowhere USA to sit and wait for an agent of the company to show up 3 days later to claim them meets the level of safeguarding. To me it is careless but I am sure we are missing lots of details.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

In a perfect world we should be able to expect to not get robbed but that is why there are safes, vaults, safe deposit boxes, alarms, etc. At the end of the day, it is the person(s) who is/are in possession of the valuables to take the appropriate steps to safeguard them at all times.

I cannot see how sending the box, which could have been carried on a flight, to a Best Western in the middle of nowhere USA to sit and wait for an agent of the company to show up 3 days later to claim them meets the level of safeguarding. To me it is careless but I am sure we are missing lots of details.

I hope we do get more information about the entire scenario because I for one have wayyyyy more questions than answers right now.

[parkplace33]

All this talk of hotels did make me think of this vintage commercial

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHCTaUFXpP8

[Kingcobb]

Is there a list of the cards that were stolen?

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

I am about as certain as I can be that ML would've consulted with counsel before making the decision they did. I don't remember ever discussing auctioning of things that have been stolen prior to completion of the auction. It's a pretty unique scenario.

A related concept that is covered and is legal is that there are a surprising number of auction companies (not necessarily sports) that auction items they don't have possession of. Whether they're allowing a consignor hold the item until they approve of the sale and in some cases even allowing them to ship it on to the final destination on behalf of the auction company. We are advised against the practice in school for a number of pretty obvious reasons. I've had consignors try and make these arrangements with me, we turn down the consignments. Amazingly though, it is not actually illegal (really isn't that in essence what an ebay auction is?)

Thanks, Scott. Appreciate your perspective.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

I am about as certain as I can be that ML would've consulted with counsel before making the decision they did. I don't remember ever discussing auctioning of things that have been stolen prior to completion of the auction. It's a pretty unique scenario.

A related concept that is covered and is legal is that there are a surprising number of auction companies (not necessarily sports) that auction items they don't have possession of. Whether they're allowing a consignor hold the item until they approve of the sale and in some cases even allowing them to ship it on to the final destination on behalf of the auction company. We are advised against the practice in school for a number of pretty obvious reasons. I've had consignors try and make these arrangements with me, we turn down the consignments. Amazingly though, it is not actually illegal (really isn't that in essence what an ebay auction is?)

Scott, appreciate your insight. Since you are the only AH to comment on this thread, what would you have done if consignments in an upcoming auction were stolen?

[Powell]

I believe Memory Lane had and has a good faith need the cards would be recovered. It is making consignors whole. I cut ML slack here.