BST etiquette am I wrong

[BobbyStrawberry]

I find it odd that the seller would, after receiving an "I'll take it" message, respond with "Are you good with my asking price?"

[Vintage Vern]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

I find it odd that the seller would, after receiving an "I'll take it" message, respond with "Are you good with my asking price?"

I think the seller wanted to know if buyer was good with paying the total asking price plus any additional charges so there was nothing misconstrued.

[Vintage Vern]

For future reference what is the correct procedure? To claim it on the board first then handle all other parts of the transaction with a DM or just skip the board, and go straight DM from the jump?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Vintage Vern

For future reference what is the correct procedure? To claim it on the board first then handle all other parts of the transaction with a DM or just skip the board, and go straight DM from the jump?

It's best to do a PM and a post, in the thread, but I ALWAYS go by time stamps as a seller, regardless of the way it's communicated.

Here is my view. Until both parties acknowlege the deal is done, then it isn't done. Merely saying "I will take it" is only half of the equation. Communication is key. I would venture to guess 99+/- % of folks never have this issue. I have been beat to the punch more times than I can remember on the BST. I lick my wounds and walk away.

The OP is out for several, but says he never said "sold" or "it's yours"...etc. ..And also to let him know quickly, as others were in line. But again, we will see ....

[bigfanNY]

Leon can see the timestamps. I stand by my OP. Evereryone can read thread and I quoted his response completely.
That fact that he replied to me says the card was available. And he had my statment of "I will take it".

[Leon]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Leon can see the timestamps. I stand by my OP. Evereryone can read thread and I quoted his response completely.
That fact that he replied to me says the card was available. And he had my statment of "I will take it".

But he never said it was yours?, and I think until then someone else could sneak in and he say it's theirs. He said sold, in that thread...which is what I erroneously read the same way you did. But it was sold to someone else in the few hours it took you to get back to him.....

He says he can get time stamps later today. I always try to be fair.

ps....I have never seen anyone's pm's on the forum. If they incorreclty hit reply to a pm, it could come to me by accident to my email. I could probably figure out how to read them but have never wanted to.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Jonathan posted he would take the card. He obviously was OK with the price and obviously intended to pay. At that point, seller should have waited a reasonable time to work out the payment mechanics. Not as a matter of contract law, not gonna rehash that, but as a matter of principle/etiquette/whatever.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Jonathan posted he would take the card. He obviously was OK with the price and obviously intended to pay. At that point, seller should have waited a reasonable time to work out the payment mechanics. Not as a matter of contract law, not gonna rehash that, but as a matter of principle/etiquette/whatever.

Hard to say without knowing what PMs the seller may have received from others.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jayshum

Hard to say without knowing what PMs the seller may have received from others.

What difference does it make? Jonathan said he would take the card and given his long history here there is no reason whatever to doubt him. It's not hard in this world to do the right thing by people.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Jonathan posted he would take the card. He obviously was OK with the price and obviously intended to pay. At that point, seller should have waited a reasonable time to work out the payment mechanics. Not as a matter of contract law, not gonna rehash that, but as a matter of principle/etiquette/whatever.

I agree it should be sold to the first person when there is a contract. Offer AND acceptance.
According to the seller it was around 2 hours later when Jonathan got back to him AND he originally told him to hurry as others were in line.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

I agree it should be sold to the first person when there is a contract. Offer AND acceptance.
According to the seller it was around 2 hours later when Jonathan got back to him AND he originally told him to hurry as others were in line.

Two hours is a long time? That's absurd IMO. And again, this is not a matter of contract law, it's a matter of decency and common sense. I am surprised you don't see this, honestly.

[bigfanNY]

So if seller posts I have card for sale for $100 and potential buyer posts I will take it. Other potential buyers can in your words Sneak in and buy it? Can buyers sneak out of deals after saying I will take it?

His reply saying we are good at $1750? Isn't conformation we had a meeting of the minds? And that the card was / is available when I posted I will take it?

I'm asking here I know Peter and Ohio Lawyer discussed this recently at length. But I am not a lawyer just a collector

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

So if seller posts I have card for sale for $100 and potential buyer posts I will take it. Other potential buyers can in your words Sneak in and buy it? Can buyers sneak out of deals after saying I will take it?

His reply saying we are good at $1750? Isn't conformation we had a meeting of the minds? And that the card was / is available when I posted I will take it?

I'm asking here I know Peter and Ohio Lawyer discussed this recently at length. But I am not a lawyer just a collector

Technically you didn't have a contract because technically you saying I'll take it was an offer, not an acceptance IMO. But again, to me that's not the issue. Any decent person would have given you a chance to confirm the requested payment terms. What ever happened to people doing the right thing not because they had to, but because it was the right thing?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Technically you didn't have a contract because technically you saying I'll take it was an offer, not an acceptance IMO. But again, to me that's not the issue. Any decent person would have given you a chance to confirm the requested payment terms. What ever happened to people doing the right thing not because they had to, but because it was the right thing?

Like I said, I would have waited but not sure I want to get in the middle of that kind of situation, from a punitive standpoint. I could see Judge Judy saying "ok, don't do anymore deals with him"...

She should run for President. (well, maybe 15-20 yrs ago)
.

[brunswickreeves]

Net54 BST is not unique to this conundrum of when a card is ACTUALLY owned by a buyer.

With eBay, you can have a discussion with seller, agree to a price, click buy now thus indicating willingness to pay, and the card sits in a virtual shopping cart until payment is made and clears the the bank, thus binding the agreement between seller and buyer. Until then, other buyers can swoop in despite the card being ‘In your Cart’, make payment, and when payment clears, the card disappears from your cart, with the rightful owner being the one who’s payment cleared first.

Lesson here? Assume all positive intent, but see the process through until the very end when the payment clears the bank so to speak. Unless of course you’ve done business together in the past and have established trust and/or process.