What I find troubling is that one of the larger consigments I made with Mastro (multiple lots with a total value of $75k+) I was paid in a couple of installments. I received one payment 30-40 days after the auction with a breakdown of the lots that I was being paid for. These were lots that Mastro had been paid for. I was not paid for two lots because the winners had not yet made payment to Mastro. Those two lots sold for $22k and $4k. It stated on the breakdown that Mastro had not been paid for those lots and approximately two weeks later I received a check for those two remaining lots.
If the problem is that they are waiting on money from winning bidders then why would they not just communicate with the unpaid consignors and state that they have not been paid for those lots? The only unpaid consignors should be the ones where those consigned lots have yet to be paid by the winning bidders in those auctions. They should never mix the monies together. Mastro should only pay consignors of those lots that have already been paid for.
Those unpaid consignors should have the right after this long of time to get their consignment back or at least be offered to the underbidder. If these items were sent to the winning bidder before payment had been made then shame on them and they deserve everything that is coming down on them.
The winning bidder holding these items could arrested for theft by deception but since Mastro basically sent these on "credit" terms this could be construed as a civil matter which makes it much more difficult when no jail time is in play.
|
06-29-2009, 09:56 AM
Hybrid Mode
