Should auction houses honor all items that accompany their own LOA?

[botn]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I think theres probably a statute of limitations...murder i know there is no statute of limitations i dont think a fake Wade Boggs signature for example gets the same treatment but there should be a decent period of time..

You are actually suggesting the LOA has an expiration date? Further how can a statute run on Tony, the newest owner, if upon receiving it he decided to research it's authenticity and found out it is not what the house purported it to be?

The house who issued the LOA should buy the item back from Tony at whatever price he paid for it unless he is able to prove the person who sold it to him knew the item was not legit

[SyrNy1960]

Originally Posted by botn

You are actually suggesting the LOA has an expiration date? Further how can a statute run on Tony, the newest owner, if upon receiving it he decided to research it's authenticity and found out it is not what the house purported it to be?

Thanks! Frustrating that there are always so many shoulda, coulda, woulda's. For me, this is simple. Auction House puts their LOA on the item, they own it and they are held accountable for it!!!

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by botn

You are actually suggesting the LOA has an expiration date? Further how can a statute run on Tony, the newest owner, if upon receiving it he decided to research it's authenticity and found out it is not what the house purported it to be?

The house who issued the LOA should buy the item back from Tony at whatever price he paid for it unless he is able to prove the person who sold it to him knew the item was not legit

I understand the morality but I can assure you there is going to be a statute of limitations on it. It doesnt mean that the person cant refund the money back after the statue of limitations expires, its just they legally wont have too. (which wouldnt give the AH good reviews)

You can also find out you sold 1000s of items that turned out to be fake and file Bankruptcy and not owe anything or as someone else alluded to, if the auction house closed for business they wont owe anything.

So in theory they can close a day after the auction. There are lots of ways sellers can get out of their responsibility. If you win an item you may want to have it independently verified so you have more than enough time to return it.

Of course if theres a criminal act going on, different time periods would apply etc...

[botn]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I understand the morality but I can assure you there is going to be a statute of limitations on it. It doesnt mean that the person cant refund the money back after the statue of limitations expires, its just they legally wont have too. (which wouldnt give the AH good reviews)

You can also find out you sold 1000s of items that turned out to be fake and file Bankruptcy and not owe anything or as someone else alluded to, if the auction house closed for business they wont owe anything.

So in theory they can close a day after the auction. There are lots of ways sellers can get out of their responsibility. If you win an item you may want to have it independently verified so you have more than enough time to return it.

Of course if theres a criminal act going on, different time periods would apply etc...

Oy...

The auction house in question is not out of business nor have they filed bankruptcy in this situation. My point assumes the company is a going concern.

[vintagetoppsguy]

As Greg said, an auction house LOA should not have an expiration date (assuming the auction house is still in business) and, unless otherwise stated, the claim of authenticity should be transferable to another owner.

[SyrNy1960]

The auction house that stepped up and took responsibility 10 years later, their auction house LOA read as follows: OUR OPINIONS ARE BASED ON INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO US FROM WHAT WE BELIEVE ARE RELIABLE SOURCES. HOWEVER, WE CAN NOT GUARANTEE THAT THE EQUIPMENT WAS USED BY A SPECIFIC PLAYER.

First, that is the dumbest thing ever! How can you provide an LOA and state that. Makes no sense.

Second, even with that said, they did step up and take responsibility. Kudos to them!

[ZachS]

Originally Posted by 3arod13

the auction house that stepped up and took responsibility 10 years later, their auction house loa read as follows: Our opinions are based on information available to us from what we believe are reliable sources. However, we can not guarantee that the equipment was used by a specific player.

Our letter of authenticity in no way guarantees authenticity.

[jfkheat]

Originally Posted by ZachS

Our letter of authenticity in no way guarantees authenticity.

What is the purpose of a letter of authenticity if it doesn't guarantee authenticity?
James

[drcy]

Not commenting on this specific case, but I think in general the refund comes from the person you bought it from. Especially after ten years, the seller has to be doing his own research on the items he sells. He is the seller.

I can also see how a person would be troubled about ten years later giving a refund to a person who was the person who bought it from them. In these days of theft et al, the person with the item at least has to prove he is the rightful/legal owner. If I sold something at a garage sale and a week a stranger else came to my door for a refund, my first response would be "Who are you? I've never seen you before in my life."

Lastly, look to the refund terms of the auction house. If at the original sale, the auction house said we will give full refund if an item turns out to be fake if it is returned within a year, those were the terms. Someone ten years later who didn't participate in the auction retroactively rewriting the sales terms (in their favor) sound pretty dubious.

Though I understand that you're not just talking about an auction, but a LOA. If there had been no LOA by the auction house, you may agree with everything I wrote above.

Though I will say one thing: you can't rhetorically rerwrite an LOA. If, for example, an LOA says "We believe this bat may have been used by Peter Rose" you can't ask for a refund under the guise that it says "We are 100% certain the bat was used by Pete Rose." A LOA is a document and you go by what it says. Though I have read many LOAs that, for example, say "We guarantee this item is 100% authentic and was hand signed by Joe DiMaggio."

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by drcy

Not commenting on this specific case, but I think in general the refund comes from the person you bought it from. Especially after ten years, the seller has to be doing his own research on the items he sells.

I can also see how a person would be troubled about ten years later giving a refund to a person who was the person who bought it from them. In these days of theft et al, the person with the item at least has to prove he is the rightful/legal owner. If I sold something at a garage sale and a week a stranger else came to my door for a refund, my first response would be "Who are you? I've never seen you before in my life."

It always will come back to the original owner eventually. If AH sells a card for 100k to person A, then Person A sells the card to Person B for 100k. You think that the AH is in the clear? Person B would end up suing person A and person A would end up suing the AH....it will always trace back to the original buyer if they can find him

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by botn

Oy...

The auction house in question is not out of business nor have they filed bankruptcy in this situation. My point assumes the company is a going concern.

Oy, and I answered you, as long as the statute of limitations have not expired than the AH would owe the money. Of course like i said they could avoid bad publicity that would hurt their wallet if they refused to pay even if they legally didnt have to as well...