Questionable Estate Auction practice


Yesterday I attended an auction with high end equipment.
I won a pair of speakers but after all the items in the setup, (turntable, amp, pre-amp, cassette deck, cd player), were sold as individual pieces, the auctioneer restarted the bidding as a set. This starts the bidding at the total price bid for all the items. As a result someone bid on 'the set' so all the individual bidders were SOL. I was not willing to go that high to get the speakers, (I didn't want the other items). So I lost the speakers even though I bid the highest. I was upset and I'm not sure if this practice was even legal. Anyone ever here of this? BTW-Speakers where Apogee Duetta II's.
fse

Showing 5 responses by swampwalker

Sleazy practice at best; deliberately deceptive in all likelihood. It seems to me like they knew they had a bidder for the whole system and used the individual bidders as "shills" to run up the price. Plenty of very questionable practices in auction world; on line and in person. However, the reality is that there is no practical relief you could be granted, because you didn't suffer any loss in an economic sense. Even if what they did is "illegal" letting it go like you did is probably best for your mental health.
Zd- I agree, contract was created. Auctioneer broke contract, what are the damages? Not a lawyer (but I play one on TV) but again, what kind of relief could you get? No court is gonna take the items away from the system purchaser and Fse did not lose any $, so unless Fse asked the court to enjoin the auctioneer from that practice, there is not much else they could do. I suppose there might be a consumer protection law violation but that would probably result, at best, in a consent agreement not to do it again. Best to just chalk it up to experience and make a mental note to avoid that guy's auctions.
I was trying to point out that it's rarely as easy as "take him to small claims court". Even when you have an "open and shut" case; like when I have a client that does not pay a bill for work they ordered and for which they received value, it's very rare that you can get satisfaction in small claims even when you are actually out real $. IME, a contract (written or verbal) for the kind of amounts we are talking about, is rarely worth more than the personal commitment that both parties have to honor it.
Small claims, as far as I understand it, is when Joe says Frank owes him $X for a service or for an item that was delivered but not paid for. Frank says the service was not performed, or the item was not delivered, or the service/item was not as advertised or agreed upon. Since the $ value of the dispute is less than a certain amount, an abbreviated process with a judge deciding the matter based on the facts as described by Joe and Frank. But what are you gonna claim? The auctioneer does not owe Fse any money. Fse did not suffer any $ loss. He lost the opportunity to buy something. The auctioneer no longer has the item so he can't sell it to Fse at any price.
Look, this is kind of a silly argument but my point is that given the $ limit in small claims (my state is $2500). Even if you "win" by default, then you most likely will have to pay a sheriff or marshal to serve the judgment and then given that they almost certainly will not pay, you have to find the bank where the auctioneer has an account, and pay the sheriff or marshal to seize the $ from the account, assuming that they have not emptied the account and closed down that business entity. Given the limited recovery vs. legal fees to go to "big claims" court, AND the series of facts that you would have to prove, it's extremely unlikely that it would make economic sense to pursue it. Add in the mental energy and hassle and, IMO, it's best to just walk away. Sometimes you just have to say the guy's an unethical jerk and walk away, for your own piece of mind.