N54 legal: can you pursue an eBay seller for "damages " if they won't deliver a card

[silvor]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

My two cents.

Leaving aside practical considerations, a buyer could sue for damages if there was an offer and acceptance, subject to contractual defenses and assuming that there is nothing in Ebay's rules that limits a buyer's remedies.

Does "acceptance" legally mean money was exchanged? Or is that not right? My guess if you paid, then they simply refunded, you have a better case.

But look at residential real estate...buyers back out all the time for no reason, and rarely are held accountable. And that's parties in the same state. The problem with ebay is you are crossing state lines (usually) and laws differ.

[packs]

I don't think this is viable. Let me throw another hypothetical scenario at you that has a similar theme:

Let's say you bought and paid for a Babe Ruth single signed baseball from an auction house. The auction house sends you the baseball, but it's not authentic. The auction house offers you a refund so that you're made whole, but you insist they send you an identical authentic Ruth instead. And then sue them for damages related to a future sale of the valuable baseball, which you now aren't able to sell.

I don't think that situation would end well for anyone. I'd neg the seller and forget about it.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't think this is viable. Let me throw another hypothetical scenario at you that has a similar theme:

Let's say you bought and paid for a Babe Ruth single signed baseball from an auction house. The auction house sends you the baseball, but it's not authentic. The auction house offers you a refund so that you're made whole, but you insist they send you an identical authentic Ruth instead. And then sue them for damages related to a future sale of the valuable baseball, which you now aren't able to sell.

I don't think that situation would end well for anyone. I'd neg the seller and forget about it.

Many auction houses have liability limitations as part of their rules/terms, precluding recovery of "benefit of the bargain" damages that I discussed earlier. Some states have specific statutes barring recovery of these types of damages in certain kinds of transactions. I did not review Ebay's rules nor the laws of any particular state. If the auction house rules provide that its liability cannot exceed the amount of the bid price, for example, those are most likely going to be upheld.

STANDARD DISCLAIMER: This comment is general and is not to be considered as applicable to any specific situation or as legal advice you should follow. Please seek a consultation with legal counsel and provide a full description of your facts and circumstances if you want a formal legal opinion.

[ezez420]

Or what about if a net54 member has another person buy something on ebay and not pay??? Can you pursue recourse against that net54 member?

[ALR-bishop]

Hypothetically of course

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by silvor

Does "acceptance" legally mean money was exchanged? Or is that not right? My guess if you paid, then they simply refunded, you have a better case.

But look at residential real estate...buyers back out all the time for no reason, and rarely are held accountable. And that's parties in the same state. The problem with ebay is you are crossing state lines (usually) and laws differ.

It is not always cut and dry in real estate. The buyers can lose their EMD (earnest money deposit) in certain cases.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by silvor

Does "acceptance" legally mean money was exchanged? Or is that not right? My guess if you paid, then they simply refunded, you have a better case.

But look at residential real estate...buyers back out all the time for no reason, and rarely are held accountable. And that's parties in the same state. The problem with ebay is you are crossing state lines (usually) and laws differ.

Acceptance by buyer does not require payment, which is performance. It likely would be a valid defense if seller could show that buyer had no ability or intention to perform, however. IOW, buyer would need to show he was ready, willing and able to pay.

Real estate transactions are different animals, and laws can vary widely from state to state. As mentioned, there is often a forfeiture of earnest money deposits and even down payments, depending upon the language of the real estate purchase contract and any limitations imposed by state statute.

STANDARD DISCLAIMER: This comment is general and is not to be considered as applicable to any specific situation or as legal advice you should follow. Please seek a consultation with legal counsel and provide a full description of your facts and circumstances if you want a formal legal opinion.

[Bcwcardz]

Originally Posted by silvor

Does "acceptance" legally mean money was exchanged? Or is that not right? My guess if you paid, then they simply refunded, you have a better case.



But look at residential real estate...buyers back out all the time for no reason, and rarely are held accountable. And that's parties in the same state. The problem with ebay is you are crossing state lines (usually) and laws differ.

I remember as a buyer of real estate I had a certain amount of time(I think 48hrs) to change my mind. I don’t think a seller has that right. For sports cards I don’t think there is any precedent for the situation. I really wouldn’t bother if I got refunded. That’s me though and I’m not much for confrontation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by Bcwcardz

I remember as a buyer of real estate I had a certain amount of time(I think 48hrs) to change my mind. I don’t think a seller has that right. For sports cards I don’t think there is any precedent for the situation. I really wouldn’t bother if I got refunded. That’s me though and I’m not much for confrontation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In real estate transactions the seller can and does change their mind. It is not the most prudent thing to do, but it does happen, especially when they discover they can get more money from another buyer. The downside is that the buyer, if they want the property bad enough, can file an action in civil court for specific performance to compel the owner to sell to them. Some cases are found in favor of the original buyer. Depending on the offer and the P&S (Purchase and sale) agreement, you could back out as a buyer well after 48 hours. The property failing inspection is one reason to void the offer. Another example would be if the property is not marketable, where the title can stand on its own without any defects. It could be insurable, where the title insurance company is willing to insure over the defects based on risk analysis, but not marketable. Most offers and P&S's will say insurable, but I have always added the words 'must be marketable, not just insurable' when I have purchased. Disclosure: 33 years as a title examiner and know quite a bit more property law than a great percentage of attorneys.

[jfkheat]

How did this turn into a real estate discussion?

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by jfkheat

How did this turn into a real estate discussion?

The nature of a good conversation. The two attorneys, Todd and Adam, addressed the standard contract, UCC-1 issues and pretty much answered the original question. I felt the few generalized real estate comments deserved comments, thus the conversation morphed. Not every conversation need be a railroad track, straight and narrow.

[ALR-bishop]

And what if the transaction occurred on a cruise ship traveling in the Gulf of Aden ? Would maritime law come into play ? Law of closest country ? Does it matter in which country the ship is registered ?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

And what if the transaction occurred on a cruise ship traveling in the Gulf of Aden ? Would maritime law come into play ? Law of closest country ? Does it matter in which country the ship is registered ?

Follow the flag.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Michael B

The nature of a good conversation. The two attorneys, Todd and Adam, addressed the standard contract, UCC-1 issues and pretty much answered the original question. I felt the few generalized real estate comments deserved comments, thus the conversation morphed. Not every conversation need be a railroad track, straight and narrow.

I have a buddy who his conversant on a lot of topics, when we get going we often wonder how we got to where we arrived conversationally. We have actually tried to piece the conversation together backwards and it can be surprisingly difficult. We call it conversational archeology. Forums ruin that fun.

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by jfkheat

How did this turn into a real estate discussion?

Ted mentioned something about agreeing to buy Babe Ruth's original house from an ebay seller who then pulled out of the deal leaving Ted homeless and wanting to sue... Did I get that right?

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

I have heard that Yeman and Somalia offer reciprocity

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

And what if the transaction occurred on a cruise ship traveling in the Gulf of Aden ? Would maritime law come into play ? Law of closest country ? Does it matter in which country the ship is registered ?

Al’s world travels are deductible as a business expense because of that card shop he owns in Sala’a, doing business as “Topps in Yemen”. Yeah, man.