Brian Drent grades GEM MINT 10 for integrity

[Peter_Spaeth]

No win situation for Brian -- no matter what he does someone is going to be unhappy -- hard to fault his choice to return the card to its owner as the consignor maybe still has recourse against the thief.

[pwilk17]

I am by no means an expert in law. It seems to me that there is now verifiable proof that the thief did in fact receive the card (he had it to sell it) and the matter should be escalated with the credit card company that did the charge back. It probably will be a hassle, however I believe it needs to be done. The thief must have some means as he had a credit card with a limit high enough to purchase the card.

[Bosox Blair]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

No win situation for Brian -- no matter what he does someone is going to be unhappy -- hard to fault his choice to return the card to its owner as the consignor maybe still has recourse against the thief.

Well the "bona fide purchaser for value without notice" doctrine, which applies in many, many jurisdictions assumes the exact opposite. The consignor in this scenario would take good title to the card and it is the person who was originally scammed who must seek his recourse against the "thief".

This is what I've been driving at - the answer to this question is not obvious and may differ depending on where you live.

Cheers,
Blair

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Bosox Blair

Well the "bona fide purchaser for value without notice" doctrine, which applies in many, many jurisdictions assumes the exact opposite. The consignor in this scenario would take good title to the card and it is the person who was originally scammed who must seek his recourse against the "thief".

This is what I've been driving at - the answer to this question is not obvious and may differ depending on where you live.

Cheers,
Blair

We have been through this before but a thief cannot convey good title to anyone, even to a BFP. The one complication here may be if the thief had voidable title, in which case a BFP may take good title. So the question is whether obtaining the card in this fashion is theft, or something more akin to fraud.

[pwilk17]

The Credit Card Company made an error in approving the charge back! It can now be proved that their credit card customer received the item and they need to give Dan back his money and collect from their crook. The innocent consignor then should be allowed to sell it in Memory Lane's auction. The crook got his cash from the innocent consignor. If the crook got less from the innocent consignor than he paid Dan - Oh well! The crook deserves to be charged with fraud, however if no one wants to follow through with this (the credit card company should lead the charge on this), then at least Dan will have his original sale price, the innocent consignor will have his card to auction or sell and the crook will have the consignors money. Neither Dan nor the consignor should be out on this and this would right the situation.

[Bosox Blair]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

We have been through this before but a thief cannot convey good title to anyone, even to a BFP. The one complication here may be if the thief had voidable title, in which case a BFP may take good title. So the question is whether obtaining the card in this fashion is theft, or something more akin to fraud.

Well the original owner did convey the card with the intention of transferring title, right? So assuming this transaction was induced by fraud, it is not "theft" - it would be fraud. Which results in voidable title in the fraudster. Which then becomes good title in the BFP.

Anyways, I did not intend to turn this into law talk (which I enjoy, but I'm sure is boring to most people on the Board).

I'd like the people who think it is so clear to consider it this way:

You spent $5,500 to buy a nice graded green Cobb at a card show - approximately market value. It is a prized card in your collection. Later, you need money for medical bills, kid's school, you lose your job...whatever. You decide, among your many options for selling your Cobb, that Mile High has a great reputation. You are needing to get your money back out of this card (or better) so you trust Mile High to help you sell it and you mail your Cobb to them in good faith. Then, Mile High, acting as judge/jury, in the absence of any hearing or judicial finding of any kind, unilaterally decides that you are not the proper owner of the Cobb. They advise you that you are not getting the Cobb back or any of your money. The card will be sent to someone you never heard of.

Still think this is fair?

Anyways, I've expressed my views on this, so I won't try to make it any clearer than that. If people disagree with me, I respect that.


Cheers,
Blair