Seller backed out after receiving a better offer!!!

Moglex

soolin wrote:

We cover the 'does a seller legally have to sell' issue before, and no one has ever managed to prove conclusively that a buyer has ever managed to sue a seller for loss of bargain.

There was a thread, either here or on the DVD Forums buyers thread, where a seller told the tale of exactly that happening.

He'd sold an item to a solicitor and then discovered that he no longer had it (bookkeeping error - he'd sold it already). The solicitor took him to court for breach of contract and won.

Unfortunately, the search facilities on forum software are rather hopeless and I can't find the post now.

We can't even sue a shop,

That's news to me.

Admittedly I've never actually done it because once they know you're deadly serious they invariably cave in.

otherwise many of us on here would have out TV and DVD packages from two major high street retailers that we all bought *and* paid for a couple of years back, and never received.

How were you persuaded that you could not sue?

There is also a thead running on ebay.Ca at the moment:

http://forums.ebay.ca/thread.jspa?threadID=500013413&tstart=0&mod=1160006354509

This is just a single page with a couple of opinions.

In my experience a lot of people just parrot what others have said in a very authoratative manner, but with no real knowledge.

Although I'm not a practicing legal type, I did study contract law for a couple of years and know the basic tests for the formation of a contract.

AFAICS, once an auction is ended (though not before), the important test of consideration on both sides is satisfied, and a contract is formed. That certainly seemed to be the view of the court in the case of the guy who lost his case.

soolin

The test case of a lawyer suing for loss of contract comes up quite a bit, yet there is nothing at all showing when I try to do a google search. Last time this was discussed on a different forum (it was a shop, not ebay involved) it was suggested that the lawyer won the loss of bargain case by default, the story was either the case settled out of court, or he won as defendant did not turn up to dispute the case.

My remembering of this rather leads me to believe it could almost be an urban myth type situation, that we all remember slightly differently. However, unless there is a test case that anyone can find that was taken to the court and won properly, and not by default, I think the situation is still uncertain. I would be as interested as you Moglex to get a definitive answer on this one, and when I have some time I will see if there is anything I have overlooked online, maybe it is there but my clumsy searching hasn't turned it up yet.

A test case might be useful, but since this is likely to go as far as it can. Court of appeal etc and cost millions I don't think it will happen on a small ebay item. Maybe one day a group of people with some real money could test this in the courts, as without precedent we can all interpret the relevant laws as we believe they are meant to be used and rather go round in circles.

Soo

payless

I once broke an item whilst wrapping it .. just gave the buyer a refund, who was happy that I did not try and pass on dodgy goods. ( I paid ebay fees still) ...


If someone claimed to have posted something, but it never arrived , I sure each side would have accepted the position and processed a refund ........ do you see where I'm going with this

Moglex

soolin wrote:

The test case of a lawyer suing for loss of contract comes up quite a bit, yet there is nothing at all showing when I try to do a google search. Last time this was discussed on a different forum (it was a shop, not ebay involved) it was suggested that the lawyer won the loss of bargain case by default, the story was either the case settled out of court, or he won as defendant did not turn up to dispute the case.

My recollection is quite definite as far as it goes. It was within the last couple of months, and the defendant did turn up at the court. I remember he said that the solicitor was very surprised that the judge gave him the amount he'd sued for and actually settled for less.

[/quote]maybe it is there but my clumsy searching hasn't turned it up yet.[/quote]It's not your searching that's clumsey, it's the forum software (not just this site). It works to a degree but I've frequently found it won't report posts with the text you ask for.

A test case might be useful, but since this is likely to go as far as it can. Court of appeal etc and cost millions I don't think it will happen on a small ebay item. Maybe one day a group of people with some real money could test this in the courts, as without precedent we can all interpret the relevant laws as we believe they are meant to be used and rather go round in circles.

I suspect that, on whichever side of the fence you stood, if you went and asked a solictor if you had a case, his response, assuming there was no overriding reason why you did not have (or could not defend) a case, would be something in the order of "it depends how the judge felt on the day".

That said, I can see no earthly reason why a contract does not exist once the auction has ended. And if a contract exists, you can certainly sue and be sued in the event of a breach. That's for the simple loss. Damages are another matter entirely.

carl_east

payless wrote:

If someone claimed to have posted something, but it never arrived , I sure each side would have accepted the position and processed a refund ........ do you see where I'm going with this

Surely with all items valued over a certain amount though the buyer would assume that the item is insured before the item is posted. I see what you're saying though.

I just think ebay should take the lead with this type of thing though. Like a punishment of some kind. Loss of all of your feedback if you have under 100. And loss of 100 feedback points if it's over 100. Plus a three strike policy where if you get three strikes then your account is cancelled.

payless

carl_east wrote:

Surely with all items valued over a certain amount though the buyer would assume that the item is insured before the item is posted. I see what you're saying though.
.

yeah, and when the "seller" offered refund before postal claim went thro' and to refund postage and insurance ( which of course he never spent) as well the seller would think he was a really nice guy!

Bamber19

forget suing for "loss of bargain." this is plain and simple breach of contract