Almost got ripped off - sketchy ebay behaviour

BloodEagle

So this guy was a total shit yeah? 

Wazmeister

@BloodEagle - good spot and good work man !!

Voxman

redrighthand said:

Voxman said:

So, using EBay as an example, if the seller had already provided consideration ie sent you a guitar, for which you had promised to pay £200 at outset, then the bare promise becomes a legally enforceable promise.  But where the buyer has not paid anything, and goods have not changed hands, so there has been no mutual consideration that has moved between promiser & promisee, and thus this is a bare promise only which is not legally enforceable. Hence the Gumtree example. 

The timing is irrelevant. There is consideration, because the parties have agreed to sell for the agreed amount and pay the agreed amount. It doesn't matter that neither has happened immediately, what's important is that the parties have agreed these events will happen. 

So where is the legally identifiable and assessable consideration that has moved between a promisee and promiser? Yes, there has been a bare promise between the parties but as yet no consideration for money or money's worth has yet occurred.  I posted some links that might find interesting reading. 

The problem with all this, as I mentioned, is that UK law hasn't yet caught up with on-line auctions like EBay, and as with any areas of law, arguments can be put by both sides.  The problem is not so much the semantics but what in practice can be realistically and legally enforceable.  

IMO it is difficult to find any robust rationale that would allow ebay buy it now and auction bids to be legally enforced.  There are no legal precedents that fit, and until a case comes before the courts, this is all opinion.  

I can tell you that two years ago a forum ( not here) member received a small claims court summons for non-payment of an Ebay sale and I helped him draft a response containing many of the themes adopted here.  The county court judge kicked the claim out. Whilst he acknowledged the moral obligation perceived by the seller, he agreed that Ebay fell outside the UK auction rules and that he was not of the view that any sufficient consideration had been exchanged between the parties.  He did say that the buyer had to reimburse the seller for reinserting a new auction and a nominal amount for inconvenience but in my view even that was a questionable decision as I can't see how you can be a bit pregnant. 

Strangefan

Kalimna said:

Handy that both ads have the serial number blanked out/obscurred-by-fortunately-placed-reflection in exactly the same way.

My next door neighbour once bought an old landrover whilst drunk on eBay. A little harder to hide than a guitar....

Adam












But my names Matt... 

redrighthand

Voxman said:

redrighthand said:

Voxman said:

So, using EBay as an example, if the seller had already provided consideration ie sent you a guitar, for which you had promised to pay £200 at outset, then the bare promise becomes a legally enforceable promise.  But where the buyer has not paid anything, and goods have not changed hands, so there has been no mutual consideration that has moved between promiser & promisee, and thus this is a bare promise only which is not legally enforceable. Hence the Gumtree example. 

The timing is irrelevant. There is consideration, because the parties have agreed to sell for the agreed amount and pay the agreed amount. It doesn't matter that neither has happened immediately, what's important is that the parties have agreed these events will happen. 

So where is the legally identifiable and assessable consideration that has moved between a promisee and promiser? Yes, there has been a bare promise between the parties but as yet no consideration for money or money's worth has yet occurred.  I posted some links that might find interesting reading. 

The problem with all this, as I mentioned, is that UK law hasn't yet caught up with on-line auctions like EBay, and as with any areas of law, arguments can be put by both sides.  The problem is not so much the semantics but what in practice can be realistically and legally enforceable.  

IMO it is difficult to find any robust rationale that would allow ebay buy it now and auction bids to be legally enforced.  There are no legal precedents that fit, and until a case comes before the courts, this is all opinion.  

I can tell you that two years ago a forum ( not here) member received a small claims court summons for non-payment of an Ebay sale and I helped him draft a response containing many of the themes adopted here.  The county court judge kicked the claim out. Whilst he acknowledged the moral obligation perceived by the seller, he agreed that Ebay fell outside the UK auction rules and that he was not of the view that any sufficient consideration had been exchanged between the parties.  He did say that the buyer had to reimburse the seller for reinserting a new auction and a nominal amount for inconvenience but in my view even that was a questionable decision as I can't see how you can be a bit pregnant. 

The consideration is the price payable and the item being exchanged for that price. If you and I sign a contract saying that I will sell you, and you will pay for, a specified item, albeit that the payment / exchange will happen by a date at some point in future, are you suggesting that contract is not enforceable until either payment or transfer of the item happens? That wouldn't make any sense. Think about contracts to buy/sell houses (after exchange). These are legally enforceable as soon as contracts are exchanged, meaning a house buyer can lose their deposit and be sued if they fail to complete.

I can't comment on the case you mention as I don't know the facts. If you do a Google search you will find people talking about successfully taking legal action as a result of failures to complete eBay purchases.  However it doesn't sound like the judge kicked the claim out. If he decided the respondent had to pay, then presumably there was some legal basis for this. It sounds like the question was around the amount / type of loss the claimant could recover, rather than the basis of the claim itself.

Voxman

House purchases are completely different, full of formalities and specific law and procedures. But until you exchange contracts which has to be dicumented there is no contract, and either side can pull out. It is of no legal effect whatsover that an offer and acceptance has been made.

I too have read stories re alleged court enforced ebay purchases.  I've yet to have seen a real one and remember you won't get all info on the internet. If any small claims court has enforced such a dispute I would suggest a legal mistake has been made.  But I acknowledge this whole online auction things divides legal opinion too. So, we're not going to resolve it here.

MattBanshee

Voxman said:

House purchases are completely different, full of formalities and specific law and procedures. But until you exchange contracts which has to be dicumented there is no contract, and either side can pull out. It is of no legal effect whatsover that an offer and acceptance has been made.

Incorrect (edit: outside of house purchases). If there is any proof of a contractually binding agreement (verbal or written), such as emails, text messages, hand written memos etc, then that is enough.

Voxman

MattBanshee said:

Voxman said:

House purchases are completely different, full of formalities and specific law and procedures. But until you exchange contracts which has to be dicumented there is no contract, and either side can pull out. It is of no legal effect whatsover that an offer and acceptance has been made.

Incorrect (edit: outside of house purchases). If there is any proof of a contractually binding agreement (verbal or written), such as emails, text messages, hand written memos etc, then that is enough.

We were talking property purchase.

Sassafras

Maybe you'll get another chance to buy it when he relists it.

  

redrighthand

Voxman said:

House purchases are completely different, full of formalities and specific law and procedures.

- In terms of consideration and ability to sue, they aren't any different.

Voxman said:

 But until you exchange contracts which has to be dicumented there is no contract, and either side can pull out. It is of no legal effect whatsover that an offer and acceptance has been made.

- This is a different point. The equivalent to "exchange" in the eBay scenario - is when the auction ends, and a contract to buy/sell for the agreed amount takes effect. 


Voxman said:

I too have read stories re alleged court enforced ebay purchases.  I've yet to have seen a real one and remember you won't get all info on the internet. If any small claims court has enforced such a dispute I would suggest a legal mistake has been made.  But I acknowledge this whole online auction things divides legal opinion too. So, we're not going to resolve it here.

- Suffice to say that if you bid on something on eBay you should do so on the understanding you are contractually committing to buy it, and can be taken to court if you refuse. I'd say that in the vast majority of cases this won't happen because it's simply more hassle for the seller than it's worth.  Ditto where a seller refuses to sell something to you for the winning price.


I've come across a few dodgy eBay auctions of late where the sellers have been offering PayPal (I know because I've contacted a few to ask). Presumably the scam is to wait till you've bought it then try to convince you to pay a different way or fake the delivery or something like that. You definitely need to be on your guard. That's said, there are still some decent honest people on there.

BloodEagle

(Reasonably) interestng update - the guy just emailed me and asked me when I thought I would be paying?  Eh?

usedtobe

  

SteveRobinson

Send him pictures of somebody else's money

ICBM

BloodEagle said:

(Reasonably) interestng update - the guy just emailed me and asked me when I thought I would be paying?  Eh?

"When you have the guitar."



Something else interesting I noticed about this - why do scammers almost always pick odd numbers for their slightly-too-good-to-be-true prices?

£1780 is a very odd price. If you didn't know how much it was worth or wanted a quick sale, why not £2k or £1500? That was one of the first red flags on this one too.

Sassafras

ICBM said:

Something else interesting I noticed about this - why do scammers almost always pick odd numbers for their slightly-too-good-to-be-true prices?

A subconscious desire to get caught?

Now that you've pointed out this flaw in their tactics they'll become harder to detect.
I hope you're feeling good about that.
  

BloodEagle

Amazing - just spoken to ebay - they have advised me to 'just not pay' and reassured me that no action will be taken against me, which is a huge relief. They wouldnt even cancel the transaction but advised me to contact the seller to do so. Apparently no issue at all with a fraudulent seller trying to use their website. Anyway thats it, Im done with ebay for buying or selling for the forseeable

TTony

BloodEagle said:

 Apparently no issue at all with a fraudulent seller trying to use their website. 

As long as he pays the fees ...

Voxman

The most I've spent on an EBay purchase was £500 for a 1988 Fender Telecaster with original case. I had very good comms with the seller, and a good feel about him and the guitar, agreed a BIN price and job done.  

Not sure that I'd use EBay for a 'large' purchase.  When I'm in a position to buy an R8 later this year, I'm much more likely to buy from a Fretboarder who's known and trusted - especially if, as sometimes happens, another Fretboarder knows the seller and has seen/played the guitar and can vouch for both - much safer, friendlier, and nicer to stay in the FB family I think.   

thermionic

I definitely wouldn't be buying an expensive guitar from a seller who has only been a member of ebay for less than 3 months and has sold a grand total of 6 DVDs, ranging in price from 6p to £1.20!

Attempted fraud like this should have him banned from the site, but the selling fees from those 6 DVDs mean more to ebay than any kind of integrity or reputation.

Exorcist

Tell him you will pay on collection and get his address, then either turn up, or give it to the police? Not quite sure what that would achieve but I would be intrigued to see what he says.