Legal Question re: eBay

dwood · February 23, 2003 4:47AM

If I were to bid and win an acution on eBay for, lets say $1000, then refuse to pay, what legal recourse does the seller have (outside of eBay's channels)? Can he force me to close the deal? Is there a threshold amount where legal action would be an option, or a consideration?

I've got be out for a while but I'll check in later. Thanks in advance!

dwood · February 23, 2003 4:57AM

bump

Tonekiller · February 23, 2003 5:01AM

Your "won" auction is a sales contract. A buyer agrees to the contracts under eBays rules when they sign up and when they bid. A seller can enforce it but that is expensive. We have had to go after two large sales in the last year and each cost around $5000 to pursue plus court cost.

TBT

relayer · February 23, 2003 5:13AM

There is an offer (the ad) and an acceptance (the winning bidder) that creates a simple sales contract under the terms of eBay's user agreement that you agree to when you join.

Asking the court to enforce such an agreement seems like it would be an enormous waste of time and money, unless your reliance on that contract caused you do something else that you normally would have not done (like replacing inventory for example) and you can prove that the other party's breech of the contract caused you damages.

BAJJERFAN · February 23, 2003 5:59AM

Doesn't a buyer also have a 3 day right of recision/refusal as long as the "agreement" was made away from or off of the seller's premises? This is the so-called 3 day cooling off period.

FrattLaw · February 23, 2003 6:26AM

Depending on jurisdiction, which is a huge question in terms of online transactions - probably a small claims court case at best, again based upon jurisdiction and statutory damage requirements for each court. ie, small claims under $5000, municipal $5000-$25000, superior court over $25,000 in damages as possible examples. But again, where does the transaction take place, the seller's state, the buyer's state, or where the Ebay server is? More then likely, you would have to go to where the buyer is in order for the court to have jurisdiction over the real party and then if he/she didn't show and you were able to get a default judgement, you would then have to enforce it and levy possible assets/wage garnishment in that state.

In other words, a colossal waste of your time, or a colossal waste of your money if you had to hire a lawyer.

Now if you were a buyer, and there was fraud involved, you may be able to recover treble damages. But that was a whole 'nother thread.

Michael

BAJJERFAN · February 23, 2003 6:48AM

Since you agree to be bound by eBay rules wouldn't jurisdiction for any dispute/arbitration/litigation be in that state where eBay has its headquarters or principal place of business. At least from a common sense standpoint it would.

FrattLaw · February 23, 2003 6:54AM

Bajer -- that's a good point, but I'm not sure of Ebays rules, if it states that California is the state for jurisdiction, that's only one argument. I could make arguments pro and con as to that position.

You gotta remember common sense does not equal legal sense.

By the way, some states, ie jurisdictions don't have a "cooling off" period, so that might not apply here either.

Michael

dwood · February 23, 2003 7:11AM

So I'm gathering that you could likely get a judgement, but it might not be worth your time? I'm sure there aready is precedent as to where jurisdiction would fall, though I don't know what it is.

So, lets assume the seller then files claim in the proper small claims court (whichever has jurisdiction). I receive notice, and don't show up to defend myself. The Judge would likely enter a judgement in favor of the plaintiff, correct?

FrattLaw · February 23, 2003 7:34AM

Dwood, I don't want to get into a treaties on jurisdictional law, but a precedent is only binding on the court/district from which it originated in. A court precedent in Illinois is not binding on a court in California. Only a US Supreme Court opinion is binding on all the courts in the land. A state Supreme Court ruling is only binding on the courts of that particular state. Oh, yeah and only if that opinion was published. This is why law school takes 3 years to complete.

Any way, jurisdictional issues have never and may never be rectified in the sense of internet transactions, the law is still evolving.

As for your question, if you don't show and notice has been provided to you, personal service probably required and you are a resident/citizen of that state, yes, a default judgement will be given to the plaintiff, in the most simpliest of terms, again, depending on the laws of the state this occurs in. Every state has different court rules, matter of fact, most counties and individual courts have different rules, hell most judges have local standing rules, applicable only to their court. This is why it's called a law practice, because it's so complicated and just when you think you have all the rules, statutes and case law down, they go ahead and change it on you, hence you are just really practicing in order to get it right.

Lawyers don't have answers, just questions. The judge and the jury have the answers.

Michael

dwood · February 23, 2003 8:06AM

So Michael,
Going a little further....

Lets suppose I create a "shill account" then wander around eBay placing bids on things I don't think should be there (see where I'm heading?). Is it POSSIBLE that at some point, a seller could "call my bluff" and force me to follow through with a transaction (say on a 22 Plain, where I bid $2200 for a G-4 coin because I thought it was a fake)? If the seller could positively identify me, isn't it possible that I could end up having to fork over the money for that well-intentioned shill bid?

And isn't it possible that if I run around the Internet, boasting about my latest shills, that someone who doesn't agree with my tactics (possibly an eBay shareholder) could very easily "out" me to the seller, eBay, and anyone else interested?

Forgive my approach, but that thing you said about "Lawyers often start by asking questions" sounded intriguing, so I thought I'd give it a try too

Tonekiller · February 23, 2003 8:13AM

Two things:

1. Following through on your bids would be one of the less important charges the seller could pursue you for if your identity was found out.
2. Your IP is traceable and your ISP keeps logs…..

Just food for thought before you take the route of vigilante avenger.

TBT

dwood · February 23, 2003 8:26AM

TBT,
Trust me, I'm not about to go vigilante on anyone. My family has managed to evolve along with society, unlike some.

My point in this entire thread is what I see as the foolish practice we take such revelry in whenever it goes on here. One of our own will trot off to eBay, in the name of all that is right and just, and we stand back and applaud the warriors as they return from battle. Someone here got "outed" on it this weekend (Marty?), and I got to thinking that it could just be a matter of time before someone gets taught a very expensive lesson.

People wonder why I was so upset about Swimmer. It wasn't that I thought he was being honest, or that I thought his coins were real. It was that we had no right to do what we did. It was pure, unadultered vigilance, with no regard for due course, or justice. And no matter what the intentions or motivation, in this country, under MY CONSTITUTION, that is simply wrong. In trying to protect a few collectors, we were willing to piss all over the Constitutional rights afforded even Mr. Swimmer.

I don't agree with the things Bill Maher has to say, and I'd rather see him dead than allowed to continue to spread his crap (I honestly would). However, he has a right to say it, and I would defend him as well. If I don't defend him, and Swimmer, how can I expect my rights to hold any value either?

So my point is, vigilance isn't the answer. It needs to stop. And if that means one of our own has to be taught an expensive lesson, let the professor begin.

And you're right about the IPs. You can't dispute them, and even if someone is spoofing, if the ISP cooperates, there is no way to hide.

FrattLaw · February 23, 2003 9:17AM

Well, this is where I get off this thread. I'm not about to give advice that someone could turn into a free ticket to act as though he or she wanted to, BUT

If I were a seller and was harmed by a "shill" bid, I would make it a point for EBay to trace the user ID. If there is someone doing this on repeat basis, then probably, if the seller was motivated enough by damages or emotion, then it is possible to recover damages thru proper legal channels, ie a small claims suit. Furthermore, if I as a seller were harmed, I would make it point to find other similarily situated sellers and take up their cause with additional small claims suits against the shill bidder.

Vigilantes can work both ways I guess.

And TBT, unless I'm wrong, Breach of Contract isn't a criminal act, at least not in California. What exactly are you referring to in regards to the seller pursuing other remedies?

Again, let's becareful out there people!

Michael

Rampage · February 23, 2003 9:32AM

I just want to thank Michael for all the input he is always willing to give us here on the board.

I always appreciate his threads and replies.

Richard.

FrattLaw · February 23, 2003 10:31AM

Thanks, I appreciate that, I always try to help

Michael

BAJJERFAN · February 23, 2003 10:38AM

Keep in mind that winning a judgement is one thing and collecting (especially from afar) is quite another. The best answer to the question for most folks would be to neg the A$$HOLE bidder, file a NPB to get your final value fee back and move on.

Tonekiller · February 23, 2003 11:00AM

<< <i>Keep in mind that winning a judgement is one thing and collecting (especially from afar) is quite another. The best answer to the question for most folks would be to neg the A$$HOLE bidder, file a NPB to get your final value fee back and move on. >>

I would agree......not as colorfully stated but the same intent.

Michael,

I will PM you.

TBT

gsaguy · February 23, 2003 12:17PM

ttt..........a bit more rope.

GSAGUY

DHeath · February 23, 2003 12:22PM

DWood, do you know of anyone who hasn't followed through with payment, or is this hypothetical?

satootoko · February 23, 2003 12:35PM

<< <i>Doesn't a buyer also have a 3 day right of recision/refusal as long as the "agreement" was made away from or off of the seller's premises? This is the so-called 3 day cooling off period. >>

Take it from a retired bank lawyer - this is a very serious, and dangerous, misunderstanding of the law!

Laws vary from state to state, but "cooling off" laws are generally designed for the situation where the seller comes to your home. The only federal "cooling off" law is pretty much limited to transactions resulting in liens on the borrower's home.

On the basic question the simple answer is that there is an enforceable contract, but, as Frattlaw and some others have pointed out, most of the time it isn't worth the expense and effort. Of course I did hear a case while sitting as a temporary judge in small claims court where the Yahoo Auction buyer and seller both lived in the same county, so the seller didn't have much problem getting court jurisdiction over the defaulting buyer.

Edited to correct a couple of typos.

dwood · February 23, 2003 12:43PM

DHeath,
I guess its a hypothetical, but I'm getting at the shill accounts that belong to forum members. You know, scumnuker, thisauctionisascam, sellerisacrook, etc...

GSA, more rope....exactly!

DHeath · February 23, 2003 1:19PM

Well, my parting thought is that there is a flaw in the system that many are aware of. It is pretty easy to set up shop as a seller on ebay, and some sellers are able to steal digital photos and fraudulently offer coins they don't own for sale, with shipping addresses outside the US. There are also frequent listings that attempt to defraud by omission, or by displaying a non-certified coin that is represented as slabbed, etc,etc,etc. Some simple rule changes at ebay would correct most of these issues. Sellers outside the US should be required to use escrow. Ebay should police listings for obvious fraud, and at least should allow us, it's customers to complain to their employees about listings we believe are fraudulent. They should use those complaints to correct obvious errors or fraudulent selling practices. That simple change would eliminate the desire to intervene in ongoing auctions.

As for the folks buying allegedly AT'd coins, or third-tier grading company coins, I assume they are not newbies. Most newbies wouldn't think very much of a toner, and if they're buying holdered coins, I assume they know the slab is only as good as the slabber's reputation. What I'm talking about is the blatant fraud. Unfortunately, Ebay currently polices itself by relying on the buyer to complain. There is no way to prevent obvious fraud being perpetrated within the current rules without violating the rules yourself, even when you see it happening. One of the board members actually bid on a coin he owned. If we really want to be proactive, changing Ebay's policy is the long-term answer. IMO

dwood · February 24, 2003 5:57AM

A board member shilled his own auction?!?

hmmm..imagine that?!?

Legal Question re: eBay

Comments

Leave a Comment