Purchase from an auction house

hollydays

IDProtected wrote: »

The reply from the Auction House to my query quoting Sale of Goods is that "it is impossible now to even determine if these are indeed the same items". They no longer have a record of that catalogue in which the items were sold, and I think they are accusing me of fraud in some way. I'm very angry about this.

Was it an online auction also( just wondered)

hollydays

IDProtected wrote: »

All they have offered to do is to sell them again for me for no fee. I don't really want to do this as I have spent money out on getting them re-sized and they could potentially reach a lower amount than I paid for them. The auction catalogue clearly states that one is Victorian (not in Victorian style or anything like that) and the other has 3 Tourmaline and 6 small diamonds. I feel really cheated.

Sounds like you are saying you've got the auction catalogue

IDProtected

hollydays wrote: »

Was it an online auction also( just wondered)

Yes, you can also bid online through a third party, the-saleroom.com, and I have to say, you are a bit of a genius, I've just found the old catalogue on their website!

Thank you so much for being such a clever stick :T

IDProtected

hollydays wrote: »

Sounds like you are saying you've got the auction catalogue

Thanks to you, I have now!

pinkshoes

IDProtected wrote: »

Yes, you can also bid online through a third party, the-saleroom.com, and I have to say, you are a bit of a genius, I've just found the old catalogue on their website!

Thank you so much for being such a clever stick :T

I would keep pushing them, as items auctioned need to be as described. They should have verified the diamonds before advertising them as such...

Worst case scenario you might have to send them a letter befor action. Make it clear what solution you are after e.g. Partial refund or full refund and return.

IDProtected

pinkshoes wrote: »

I would keep pushing them, as items auctioned need to be as described. They should have verified the diamonds before advertising them as such...

Worst case scenario you might have to send them a letter befor action. Make it clear what solution you are after e.g. Partial refund or full refund and return.

I think I will send them one more email giving the the opportunity to look at the catalogue and respond, then I'll send a letter before action. Thanks so much for your help.

shaun_from_Africa

One point before you send the LBA.

You stated that a jeweller has valued both the rings at more than you had paid, in which case it might be worth seeing how much that jeweller will pay you for them.
If the auction house backs down and refunds you, all you will get back is the amount you originally paid, but if you can get more by selling the rings, you will make a profit and not have to waste time or money on legal action.

SnowTiger

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

One point before you send the LBA.

You stated that a jeweller has valued both the rings at more than you had paid, in which case it might be worth seeing how much that jeweller will pay you for them.

That "replacement price" is probably a valuation for insurance purposes and not a resale value.

StumpyPumpy

I doubt you are going to get anywhere.

As stated in the document linked above by unholyangel:

However, if you buy at an auction it is possible to lose these rights if:

• the goods are second hand; and
• you have the opportunity to attend the sale in person; and
• you are told that the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) didn't apply or that the goods were sold as seen. This could be by way of a notice or exclusion clause in the catalogue; and
• the auctioneer can show that this was reasonable.

As you bought old rings (even if not as old as you were led to believe) then we can assume they are second hand; you had the opportunity to attend the sale in person, though they also sell online via the-saleroom.com; I've never been to a B&M Auction that does not have Sales of Goods Act disclaimers posted up as signs around the place and by the payment/registration office, so I doubt they didn't; and in the world of antique jewellery, it is unreasonable to expect an auction house to get precious metals reassayed and stones mohs tested to prove what they are, so I'd say point 4 was covered too.

Additionally, any action against the auction house will fail as your contract is with the previous owner not them. The seller is who you need to be talking to. (The auctioneers may have unreasonably misrepresented but that is up to the seller to sue them once they have settled the dispute with the buyer) As is also pointed out it the document, your problem here is that the auctioneers have no legal obligation to pass on the sellers details to you.

Sorry to bring bad news, but you really don't want to be throwing bad money after good. Put them back in the auction or sell them to a jeweller or antique shop.

SP

ThumbRemote

StumpyPumpy wrote: »

I doubt you are going to get anywhere.

As stated in the document linked above by unholyangel:
As you bought old rings (even if not as old as you were led to believe) then we can assume they are second hand; you had the opportunity to attend the sale in person, though they also sell online via the-saleroom.com; I've never been to a B&M Auction that does not have Sales of Goods Act disclaimers posted up as signs around the place and by the payment/registration office, so I doubt they didn't; and in the world of antique jewellery, it is unreasonable to expect an auction house to get precious metals reassayed and stones mohs tested to prove what they are, so I'd say point 4 was covered too.

The following paragraph contains the sentence "However, the auction house does have some responsibilities, for example, it must not make a false statement about the goods"