Make Sure You Don't Reneg On Selling These Sets

mrearlygold · November 17, 2011 3:28AM

Even if you didn't get them. Here's a thread starter from elsewhere, edited a bit but the overall message should ring loud and clear:

XXXXm@art threatening to sue ASE 25th sellers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My order was canceled from the US mint and I never received the set of 5 coins that I sent a notice to Goldmart to sell. I just got this email today.

Dingbat

We want to remind you that we entered into a binding agreement regarding the 5 sets you sold to us. You agreed to sell and we agreed to buy, all documented via email. If you fail to execute your side of the agreement you will force us to hold you accountable by bringing this into the court system either in Orange County, CA, or XXX County, IL.

I want to let you know that we are willing to go to the furthest extent to keep you accountable to the agreement you made with our company and to protect ourselves from all damages we will incur and legal fees. To make things easy on the both of us we advise you to follow through with your commitment to us.

If we don't hear back from you we will file a lawsuit in the court system by the end of the week.

If you decide to honor your agreement and follow through we ask that you ship us the sets immediately and notify us via email.

Best Regards,

Goldmart.com
Management

1-888-470-0170

---------------------------------------------

Edit on page 3.
I just got this from them:

Dingbat

Sorry about the mix up, sorry to hear your sets where cancelled. The email was also sent you your referral, (name redacted), whose sets were not cancelled.

Best Regards

GoldClause · November 17, 2011 3:31AM

I can't imagine someone suing over this, much less winning if it's true that the mint canceled their order.

RYK · November 17, 2011 3:33AM

Will We See Someone Get Sued for not upholding commitment to sell?

I sure hope so! It will add to the fun.

Bochiman · November 17, 2011 3:36AM

Morons abound all around us.
People that get greedy, people that reneg, people that threaten to sue others....etc etc etc.

relicsncoins · November 17, 2011 3:37AM

If I committed to sell to someone I would follow through. However, I doubt an email exchange is a legally binding agreement. It's simply a scare tactic.

NewParadigm · November 17, 2011 3:38AM

They can sue and will win if they proceed. However, for the amount that is at stake, it is very unlikely they would do so.

renomedphys · November 17, 2011 3:44AM

People don't usually sue for less than a grand unless it's personal. I knew a guy that sued his neighbor for about $35 (and won) for doggie-doo cleanup fees.

NewParadigm · November 17, 2011 3:57AM

<< People don't usually sue for less than a grand unless it's personal. I knew a guy that sued his neighbor for about $35 (and won) for doggie-doo cleanup fees. >>

I agree. If they were to use legal action, it would not be for the financial benefit. It would be to "prove a point."

The OP should be fine.

BAJJERFAN · November 17, 2011 3:58AM

It all depends on the terms of the sale of course. If your deal was contingent on you getting them from the mint and the mint cancels your order, then you are off the hook. If you agreed to sell a set then you are obligated to provide a set even if you have to go out and purchase that set at what would be a net loss to you. Be very careful about what you agree to.

scotty1419 · November 17, 2011 3:59AM

Has the seller in question mentioned if he actually did reneg or if he just didnt end up getting an order in?

I know MCM and a few others took sell committments the day before onsale...

stevkc · November 17, 2011 4:01AM

<< They can sue and will win if they proceed. However, for the amount that is at stake, it is very unlikely they would do so. >>

Obviously, if you agree to something you should follow through. However, I'm not sure they would win. And if they did, exactly what damages could they collect?

The court can't really force the seller to come up with the goods and sell them--especially if he no longer has them. So the buyer then says he relied on the comittment and sold to someone else and his damages are lost profits. If this was all a pre-sale situation, the court would likely say such speculation isn't enough for recoverable damages and that it was not reasonable for the buyer to rely on the seller given the limited quantities of these sets. Considering the Mint sales situation, there was no way to know if the buyer would actually receive the sets he ordered. Always risky to sell something (or agree to buy and then re-sell) something that is not in possession.

I'm not defending the the guy who backed out, just looking at it from a legal standpoint.

comma · November 17, 2011 4:02AM

If the seller truly had an order cancelled then there is no way it would hold up in court. It's sad how crazy these are making people...I just want it all to be over.

stevkc · November 17, 2011 4:10AM

<< It all depends on the terms of the sale of course. If your deal was contingent on you getting them from the mint and the mint cancels your order, then you are off the hook. If you agreed to sell a set then you are obligated to provide a set even if you have to go out and purchase that set at what would be a net loss to you. Be very careful about what you agree to. >>

I tend to doubt that most of these e-mail deals were so detailed as to state that it was contingent on actually successfully placing and receiving an order from the Mint. I'd say that for most deals made prior to Mint delivery, and especially before the Mint sale, it is implied that the buyer would have to actually receive his Mint order.

taxmad · November 17, 2011 4:12AM

I agreed to sell them to you - I did not agree to mail them to you. Come pick them up - I live in Queensland...

BAJJERFAN · November 17, 2011 4:18AM

<< If the seller truly had an order cancelled then there is no way it would hold up in court. It's sad how crazy these are making people...I just want it all to be over. >>

They weren't only available to the mint. Once the mint ships, then the coins are available in the aftermarket. Like I said before, it depends upon what you agree to.

UNLVino · November 17, 2011 4:20AM

<< I agreed to sell them to you - I did not agree to mail them to you. Come pick them up - I live in Queensland... >>

BAJJERFAN · November 17, 2011 4:24AM

Here are two offers to buy that were placed on the BST.

1.

1) Remember, the outer boxes must remain SEALED. Opened outer USM boxes will be returned.
2) Once we have your USM order numbers it's a non reversable deal. You must deliver sealed sets, and we must pay as agreed.
3) Our checks mail within one business day of receipt of coins, and FedEx is available at no charge if requested. (min 5 sets for free FedEx)
4) We will NOT pay your shipping and insurance on less than 5 sets. We WILL pay your shipping and insurance in exact amount up to $35 total on 5 or more sets but it is ultimately your responsibility that the sets arrive to our office safely.
5) You must ship the sets to us within two (2) business days of your receipt from the USM.

2.

1) You buy 5 complete 5 pc 25th anniversary sets (A25) from the mint on the first order day (October 27th) provide me the confirmation #
2) request expedited shipping (which is a free upgrade)
3) Once the sets arrive, you ship them to me (still sealed - if they are opened, the deal is null and void)
4) Will pay in full for your costs + $25 for your shipping upon receipt
5) I will be getting these graded. Once graded, I will send you a complete PCGS graded set. This will take approx 4 weeks give or take a little

You can decide for yourself what constitutes an acceptance and commitment in each instance.

comma · November 17, 2011 4:24AM

<< 

<< If the seller truly had an order cancelled then there is no way it would hold up in court. It's sad how crazy these are making people...I just want it all to be over. >>

They weren't only available to the mint. Once the mint ships, then the coins are available in the aftermarket. Like I said before, it depends upon what you agree to. >>

I doubt a lengthy contract was signed and I doubt most people would sign something like that without having coins in hand. If it was "ya, Ill sell you my sets when I get them" in an email, then he didnt get the sets, and the company is suing... that won't hold up.

I understand you could buy sets in the aftermarket, but unless that was in some written agreement (which would be ridiculous and unlikely) I dont see what's with the threats...

mrearlygold · November 17, 2011 4:25AM

<< 

<< They can sue and will win if they proceed. However, for the amount that is at stake, it is very unlikely they would do so. >>

Obviously, if you agree to something you should follow through. However, I'm not sure they would win. And if they did, exactly what damages could they collect?

The court can't really force the seller to come up with the goods and sell them--especially if he no longer has them. So the buyer then says he relied on the comittment and sold to someone else and his damages are lost profits. If this was all a pre-sale situation, the court would likely say such speculation isn't enough for recoverable damages and that it was not reasonable for the buyer to rely on the seller given the limited quantities of these sets. Considering the Mint sales situation, there was no way to know if the buyer would actually receive the sets he ordered. Always risky to sell something (or agree to buy and then re-sell) something that is not in possession.

I'm not defending the the guy who backed out, just looking at it from a legal standpoint. >>

Are you a lawyer?

mrearlygold · November 17, 2011 4:26AM

<< I agreed to sell them to you - I did not agree to mail them to you. Come pick them up - I live in Queensland... >>

Always nice to know how some people do things.

MilesWaits · November 17, 2011 4:27AM

Speak of shipping of these heavy 5 sets, how many of you found it possible to do so for $25 or $35?

RambosCoins · November 17, 2011 4:29AM

Goldmart.com has a point if they had an agreement. They aren't winning new customers if their methods become widely known.

I am more than an little shocked at how many people are selling things they don't have - a bird in the bush.

Would I sue? No. I have passed on much larger issues because life goes on and I don't care to spend my time on such.

Would I do business again with someone who did business this way? No.

Should people be agreeing to sell things they don't have? No.

Who's fault is it? Al Gore's for inventing the Internet.

It's a shame every coin enthusiast can't get an ASE Anniversary set. They sure are racheting interest up!

Regards.

RYK · November 17, 2011 4:29AM

<< Here are two offers to buy that were placed on the BST.

1.

1) Remember, the outer boxes must remain SEALED. Opened outer USM boxes will be returned.
2) Once we have your USM order numbers it's a non reversable deal. You must deliver sealed sets, and we must pay as agreed.
3) Our checks mail within one business day of receipt of coins, and FedEx is available at no charge if requested. (min 5 sets for free FedEx)
4) We will NOT pay your shipping and insurance on less than 5 sets. We WILL pay your shipping and insurance in exact amount up to $35 total on 5 or more sets but it is ultimately your responsibility that the sets arrive to our office safely.
5) You must ship the sets to us within two (2) business days of your receipt from the USM.

2.

1) You buy 5 complete 5 pc 25th anniversary sets (A25) from the mint on the first order day (October 27th) provide me the confirmation #
2) request expedited shipping (which is a free upgrade)
3) Once the sets arrive, you ship them to me (still sealed - if they are opened, the deal is null and void)
4) Will pay in full for your costs + $25 for your shipping upon receipt
5) I will be getting these graded. Once graded, I will send you a complete PCGS graded set. This will take approx 4 weeks give or take a little

You can decide for yourself what constitutes an acceptance and commitment in each instance. >>

I will disclose that I am no lawyer (I do sleep with one, if it matters

), but it seems to me that these deals are less "solid" because no money changes hands until the coins are delivered to the market maker. I think it would be different if the market maker fronted the money and then the buyer reneged. It seems more like a promise ("I promise to send you these coins when I get them for your promise to pay...") than a contract. But what do I know?

erickso1 · November 17, 2011 4:30AM

<< 1) Remember, the outer boxes must remain SEALED. Opened outer USM boxes will be returned. >>

In hindsight, could have been a potentially crippling loop hole.

19Lyds · November 17, 2011 4:31AM

<< They can sue and will win if they proceed. However, for the amount that is at stake, it is very unlikely they would do so. >>

Why would they win?

Did they already pay for the items? If not, then the seller simply changed his mind.

RYK · November 17, 2011 4:33AM

In the future, it may be optimal for the buyers and sellers to enter a contractual agreement which both parties sign. In addition to the market maker needing protection, the individual needs protection in the event that the launch is a dud.

It might also be wise for the market makers to front some money so that there is a greater level of engagement. It might cost the market makers a little more, but their profit margins for these are enormous, so they can afford it.

Bochiman · November 17, 2011 4:40AM

<< 

<< 

<< They can sue and will win if they proceed. However, for the amount that is at stake, it is very unlikely they would do so. >>

Obviously, if you agree to something you should follow through. However, I'm not sure they would win. And if they did, exactly what damages could they collect?

The court can't really force the seller to come up with the goods and sell them--especially if he no longer has them. So the buyer then says he relied on the comittment and sold to someone else and his damages are lost profits. If this was all a pre-sale situation, the court would likely say such speculation isn't enough for recoverable damages and that it was not reasonable for the buyer to rely on the seller given the limited quantities of these sets. Considering the Mint sales situation, there was no way to know if the buyer would actually receive the sets he ordered. Always risky to sell something (or agree to buy and then re-sell) something that is not in possession.

I'm not defending the the guy who backed out, just looking at it from a legal standpoint. >>

Are you a lawyer? >>

I'm watching a re-run of Matlock right now....does that count?

Bochiman · November 17, 2011 4:41AM

<< In the future, it may be optimal for the buyers and sellers to enter a contractual agreement which both parties sign. In addition to the market maker needing protection, the individual needs protection in the event that the launch is a dud.

It might also be wise for the market makers to front some money so that there is a greater level of engagement. It might cost the market makers a little more, but their profit margins for these are enormous, so they can afford it.

>>

These issues are only going to make things harder for honest folks in the future. Look at ebay and the pre-sales....because of all the issues in the past, they made changes (that I actually agree with to be honest) that made pre-sales harder.
Same thing will happen here.

RedHerring · November 17, 2011 4:51AM

Say it's a reneg on 100 sets at $400/set.

That's $50K in losses for somebody.......

RYK · November 17, 2011 4:53AM

I think that the major market makers should have been proactive about sweetening the deal for their buyers. I have said this for weeks. If they are not getting enough of the promised product, they have no one to blame but themselves.

taxmad · November 17, 2011 4:56AM

<< 

<< I agreed to sell them to you - I did not agree to mail them to you. Come pick them up - I live in Queensland... >>

Always nice to know how some people do things.

>>

Nope - mine went out Monday to Russ for our agreed upon $2k. We were discussing outs - like 'accidentally' opening the box...

fiveNdime · November 17, 2011 5:00AM

<< The email was also sent you your referral, (name redacted), whose sets were not cancelled. >>

how did your referral respond to their threat?

comma · November 17, 2011 5:03AM

<< Say it's a reneg on 100 sets at $400/set.

That's $50K in losses for somebody....... >>

"losses" probably isn't the right word. Because they never had the sets in hand or knew what they would sell for.
The same thing applies to people who sold their sets for say $400. They made $100 a set, but could have waited and made $500. That's not really a loss since they did make $100...
just my thoughts.

BAJJERFAN · November 17, 2011 5:10AM

<< 

<< Here are two offers to buy that were placed on the BST.

1.

1) Remember, the outer boxes must remain SEALED. Opened outer USM boxes will be returned.
2) Once we have your USM order numbers it's a non reversable deal. You must deliver sealed sets, and we must pay as agreed.
3) Our checks mail within one business day of receipt of coins, and FedEx is available at no charge if requested. (min 5 sets for free FedEx)
4) We will NOT pay your shipping and insurance on less than 5 sets. We WILL pay your shipping and insurance in exact amount up to $35 total on 5 or more sets but it is ultimately your responsibility that the sets arrive to our office safely.
5) You must ship the sets to us within two (2) business days of your receipt from the USM.

2.

1) You buy 5 complete 5 pc 25th anniversary sets (A25) from the mint on the first order day (October 27th) provide me the confirmation #
2) request expedited shipping (which is a free upgrade)
3) Once the sets arrive, you ship them to me (still sealed - if they are opened, the deal is null and void)
4) Will pay in full for your costs + $25 for your shipping upon receipt
5) I will be getting these graded. Once graded, I will send you a complete PCGS graded set. This will take approx 4 weeks give or take a little

You can decide for yourself what constitutes an acceptance and commitment in each instance. >>

I will disclose that I am no lawyer (I do sleep with one, if it matters

), but it seems to me that these deals are less "solid" because no money changes hands until the coins are delivered to the market maker. I think it would be different if the market maker fronted the money and then the buyer reneged. It seems more like a promise ("I promise to send you these coins when I get them for your promise to pay...") than a contract. But what do I know? >>

In deal 1. line 2) it's sort of obvious that if you supply an order number than you are obligated to deliver whether the mint cancels the order or the package gets lost/stolen on its way to you. It is sort of ambiguous in that it refers to a specific order number, but says you must deliver sealed sets. Offer 2. suggests that you could invalidate the deal simply by opening the sets, tho I suspect that after what has happened with pricing is that neither party would return opened sets.

RYK · November 17, 2011 5:15AM

<< 

<< 

<< Here are two offers to buy that were placed on the BST.

1.

1) Remember, the outer boxes must remain SEALED. Opened outer USM boxes will be returned.
2) Once we have your USM order numbers it's a non reversable deal. You must deliver sealed sets, and we must pay as agreed.
3) Our checks mail within one business day of receipt of coins, and FedEx is available at no charge if requested. (min 5 sets for free FedEx)
4) We will NOT pay your shipping and insurance on less than 5 sets. We WILL pay your shipping and insurance in exact amount up to $35 total on 5 or more sets but it is ultimately your responsibility that the sets arrive to our office safely.
5) You must ship the sets to us within two (2) business days of your receipt from the USM.

2.

1) You buy 5 complete 5 pc 25th anniversary sets (A25) from the mint on the first order day (October 27th) provide me the confirmation #
2) request expedited shipping (which is a free upgrade)
3) Once the sets arrive, you ship them to me (still sealed - if they are opened, the deal is null and void)
4) Will pay in full for your costs + $25 for your shipping upon receipt
5) I will be getting these graded. Once graded, I will send you a complete PCGS graded set. This will take approx 4 weeks give or take a little

You can decide for yourself what constitutes an acceptance and commitment in each instance. >>

I will disclose that I am no lawyer (I do sleep with one, if it matters

), but it seems to me that these deals are less "solid" because no money changes hands until the coins are delivered to the market maker. I think it would be different if the market maker fronted the money and then the buyer reneged. It seems more like a promise ("I promise to send you these coins when I get them for your promise to pay...") than a contract. But what do I know? >>

In deal 1. line 2) it's sort of obvious that if you supply an order number than you are obligated to deliver whether the mint cancels the order or the package gets lost/stolen on its way to you. It is sort of ambiguous in that it refers to a specific order number, but says you must deliver sealed sets. Offer 2. suggests that you could invalidate the deal simply by opening the sets, tho I suspect that after what has happened with pricing is that neither party would return opened sets. >>

No problem for deal 1. "The box was stolen in transit. I am as disappointed as you are. I will take it up with my credit card company and UPS." What recourse does dealer #1 have now?

As I have said all along, the big market makers should have made partnership deals with the buyers, not sucker deals.

AUandAG · November 17, 2011 5:16AM

I agree that you have to stand by your commitment.

I also agree that the offer to buy and the offer to sell is null, if the Mint does not ship you
a set.

Also, as a side note, a promise for a promise is a legally binding contract as I recall from Business
Law 101. (I am not a lawyer). Whether it is enforceable is another question.

bob

19Lyds · November 17, 2011 5:16AM

<< 

<< 

<< Here are two offers to buy that were placed on the BST.

1.

1) Remember, the outer boxes must remain SEALED. Opened outer USM boxes will be returned.
2) Once we have your USM order numbers it's a non reversable deal. You must deliver sealed sets, and we must pay as agreed.
3) Our checks mail within one business day of receipt of coins, and FedEx is available at no charge if requested. (min 5 sets for free FedEx)
4) We will NOT pay your shipping and insurance on less than 5 sets. We WILL pay your shipping and insurance in exact amount up to $35 total on 5 or more sets but it is ultimately your responsibility that the sets arrive to our office safely.
5) You must ship the sets to us within two (2) business days of your receipt from the USM.

2.

1) You buy 5 complete 5 pc 25th anniversary sets (A25) from the mint on the first order day (October 27th) provide me the confirmation #
2) request expedited shipping (which is a free upgrade)
3) Once the sets arrive, you ship them to me (still sealed - if they are opened, the deal is null and void)
4) Will pay in full for your costs + $25 for your shipping upon receipt
5) I will be getting these graded. Once graded, I will send you a complete PCGS graded set. This will take approx 4 weeks give or take a little

You can decide for yourself what constitutes an acceptance and commitment in each instance. >>

I will disclose that I am no lawyer (I do sleep with one, if it matters

), but it seems to me that these deals are less "solid" because no money changes hands until the coins are delivered to the market maker. I think it would be different if the market maker fronted the money and then the buyer reneged. It seems more like a promise ("I promise to send you these coins when I get them for your promise to pay...") than a contract. But what do I know? >>

In deal 1. line 2) it's sort of obvious that if you supply an order number than you are obligated to deliver whether the mint cancels the order or the package gets lost/stolen on its way to you. It is sort of ambiguous in that it refers to a specific order number, but says you must deliver sealed sets. Offer 2. suggests that you could invalidate the deal simply by opening the sets, tho I suspect that after what has happened with pricing is that neither party would return opened sets. >>

What about Scenarion 1, Number 5 and Scenario 2 Number 3? Doesn't that simple act invalidate the agreement actually giving the impression that even though an agreement was reached, the seller could still screw it up and invalidate it?

RYK · November 17, 2011 5:18AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< Here are two offers to buy that were placed on the BST.

1.

1) Remember, the outer boxes must remain SEALED. Opened outer USM boxes will be returned.
2) Once we have your USM order numbers it's a non reversable deal. You must deliver sealed sets, and we must pay as agreed.
3) Our checks mail within one business day of receipt of coins, and FedEx is available at no charge if requested. (min 5 sets for free FedEx)
4) We will NOT pay your shipping and insurance on less than 5 sets. We WILL pay your shipping and insurance in exact amount up to $35 total on 5 or more sets but it is ultimately your responsibility that the sets arrive to our office safely.
5) You must ship the sets to us within two (2) business days of your receipt from the USM.

2.

1) You buy 5 complete 5 pc 25th anniversary sets (A25) from the mint on the first order day (October 27th) provide me the confirmation #
2) request expedited shipping (which is a free upgrade)
3) Once the sets arrive, you ship them to me (still sealed - if they are opened, the deal is null and void)
4) Will pay in full for your costs + $25 for your shipping upon receipt
5) I will be getting these graded. Once graded, I will send you a complete PCGS graded set. This will take approx 4 weeks give or take a little

You can decide for yourself what constitutes an acceptance and commitment in each instance. >>

I will disclose that I am no lawyer (I do sleep with one, if it matters

), but it seems to me that these deals are less "solid" because no money changes hands until the coins are delivered to the market maker. I think it would be different if the market maker fronted the money and then the buyer reneged. It seems more like a promise ("I promise to send you these coins when I get them for your promise to pay...") than a contract. But what do I know? >>

In deal 1. line 2) it's sort of obvious that if you supply an order number than you are obligated to deliver whether the mint cancels the order or the package gets lost/stolen on its way to you. It is sort of ambiguous in that it refers to a specific order number, but says you must deliver sealed sets. Offer 2. suggests that you could invalidate the deal simply by opening the sets, tho I suspect that after what has happened with pricing is that neither party would return opened sets. >>

What about Scenarion 1, Number 5 and Scenario 2 Number 3? Doesn't that simple act invalidate the agreement actually giving the impression that even though an agreement was reached, the seller could still screw it up and invalidate it? >>

Good point. "I was sick, and I could not mail it within two days. Boo-hoo. I screwed up our deal. I am as disappointed as you."

BAJJERFAN · November 17, 2011 5:26AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< Here are two offers to buy that were placed on the BST.

1.

1) Remember, the outer boxes must remain SEALED. Opened outer USM boxes will be returned.
2) Once we have your USM order numbers it's a non reversable deal. You must deliver sealed sets, and we must pay as agreed.
3) Our checks mail within one business day of receipt of coins, and FedEx is available at no charge if requested. (min 5 sets for free FedEx)
4) We will NOT pay your shipping and insurance on less than 5 sets. We WILL pay your shipping and insurance in exact amount up to $35 total on 5 or more sets but it is ultimately your responsibility that the sets arrive to our office safely.
5) You must ship the sets to us within two (2) business days of your receipt from the USM.

2.

1) You buy 5 complete 5 pc 25th anniversary sets (A25) from the mint on the first order day (October 27th) provide me the confirmation #
2) request expedited shipping (which is a free upgrade)
3) Once the sets arrive, you ship them to me (still sealed - if they are opened, the deal is null and void)
4) Will pay in full for your costs + $25 for your shipping upon receipt
5) I will be getting these graded. Once graded, I will send you a complete PCGS graded set. This will take approx 4 weeks give or take a little

You can decide for yourself what constitutes an acceptance and commitment in each instance. >>

I will disclose that I am no lawyer (I do sleep with one, if it matters

), but it seems to me that these deals are less "solid" because no money changes hands until the coins are delivered to the market maker. I think it would be different if the market maker fronted the money and then the buyer reneged. It seems more like a promise ("I promise to send you these coins when I get them for your promise to pay...") than a contract. But what do I know? >>

In deal 1. line 2) it's sort of obvious that if you supply an order number than you are obligated to deliver whether the mint cancels the order or the package gets lost/stolen on its way to you. It is sort of ambiguous in that it refers to a specific order number, but says you must deliver sealed sets. Offer 2. suggests that you could invalidate the deal simply by opening the sets, tho I suspect that after what has happened with pricing is that neither party would return opened sets. >>

What about Scenarion 1, Number 5 and Scenario 2 Number 3? Doesn't that simple act invalidate the agreement actually giving the impression that even though an agreement was reached, the seller could still screw it up and invalidate it? >>

I believe I addressed scenario 2. line 3 but if you ship after 2 days for scenario 1 that might simply negate the premium and he would reimburse you just what it cost you and no extra. Maybe JM will chime in.

khayse · November 17, 2011 5:31AM

I'm assuming in this case that people would only sue other people if the person actually did get his sets from the mint but tried to back out of selling them to the first party out of greed.
Obviously if he never got the sets he can't be held liable.

>Why would they win?
>
>Did they already pay for the items? If not, then the seller simply changed his mind.

He would win because they had a written agreement. There is no "I changed my mind" once you give the person your confirmation number.

-Keith

BAJJERFAN · November 17, 2011 5:45AM

<< I'm assuming in this case that people would only sue other people if the person actually did get his sets from the mint but tried to back out of selling them to the first party out of greed.
Obviously if he never got the sets he can't be held liable.

>Why would they win?
>
>Did they already pay for the items? If not, then the seller simply changed his mind.

He would win because they had a written agreement. There is no "I changed my mind" once you give the person your confirmation number.

-Keith >>

Depending on how strictly you interpret scenario 1. the deal may be dependent upon a specific order from the mint or it may be inferred that you will have to deliver x number of sealed sets no matter where you have to get them from.

stevkc · November 17, 2011 5:50AM

<< Here are two offers to buy that were placed on the BST.

1.
2) Once we have your USM order numbers it's a non reversable deal. You must deliver sealed sets, and we must pay as agreed.

2.
1) You buy 5 complete 5 pc 25th anniversary sets (A25) from the mint on the first order day (October 27th) provide me the confirmation #

You can decide for yourself what constitutes an acceptance and commitment in each instance. >>

Both of these require a confirmation # from the Mint. I'd say that makes the deal contingent on the seller successfully placing an order AND successfully receiving THAT order. Even without mentioning the confirmation #, I'd say it is implied that the deal is based on getting orders from the Mint.

Morally, the seller should follow through if he received his order from the Mint. Legally, the buyer might technically have a decent case, but good luck proving it. That's why I say the buyer may not win--try to PROVE the seller successfully placed an order and received it. And then damages are another issue. You would have to prove you had another buyer lined up. There's so much speculation re-selling going on here, and with the limited quanitites and huge demand, a court would probably not deem it reasonable that a buyer relied on a seller (who didn't even have the item in possession) to follow through before doing a re-sale of his own.
And would the damages be based on ebay sales now or 2-3 weeks ago? Even if it got to that point, it would likely be based on 2-3 weeks ago, not the peak of the market.

Also, a lot of the big buyers who had sellers back out were intending to send in the unopened boxes to be graded. That means a new buyer probably hadn't been lined up yet, since buyer #1 would be waiting for grades, which is more speculation on what those coins would actually be worth. Can't just assume the coins would have been 70s or even 69s.

Again, not defending anyone who actually backed out. Just thinking through the practical issues of suing over it.

Beernuts · November 17, 2011 5:55AM

Sounds like Goldmart is biting the hand that feeds them.

Of course its not right to reneg, but there are many factors as to why someone may not have received their sets - order cancelled by mint due to credit/debit card issues, order cancelled by mint due to late order #, shipment lost/destroyed, "partner" buyers reneging, etc. To send out a blanket legal threat to anyone who wasn't able, or didn't follow through, is pretty classless in my opinion.

Sure, if funds had exchanged hands, or someone agreed in writing to provide 100 sets, acquired said sets, and then backed out, I could see the need for such action. But even then, all the players knew that the ordering limits were 5 per household, and to get around that limit people would have to get creative - leaving a certain amount of uncertainty.

Bottom line, threatening legal action against Joe Schmoe for his 5 sets is just as bad as reneging, in my opinion. How many of these online dealers have caveats that say " your order may be cancelled at any time for any reason" in small print somewhere on their website?

http://www.goldmart.com/ordering-policies-guidelines
"Once a transaction price is established and a confirmation number issued, the transaction cannot be cancelled for any reason except in Goldmart’s sole and absolute discretion."

So why the double standard, Goldmart?

No, I'm not involved in this. But I can say I'll never do business with Goldmart if this is the way they conduct business.

SereneDude · November 17, 2011 6:02AM

<< I'm assuming in this case that people would only sue other people if the person actually did get his sets from the mint but tried to back out of selling them to the first party out of greed.
Obviously if he never got the sets he can't be held liable.

>Why would they win?
>
>Did they already pay for the items? If not, then the seller simply changed his mind.

He would win because they had a written agreement. There is no "I changed my mind" once you give the person your confirmation number.

-Keith >>

If the potential buyer didn't get a signed agreement, he's SOL.
Threats to sue are just that, threats.
Anybody can sue anybody for anything. That doesn't mean they will prevail at court.

Batman23 · November 17, 2011 6:05AM

<< Speak of shipping of these heavy 5 sets, how many of you found it possible to do so for $25 or $35? >>

These heavy beasts are hell on the shipping rate. I have found that 50 ounces of these cost twice as much to ship than 50 ounces of ATBs did.

BAJJERFAN · November 17, 2011 6:08AM

<< 

<< Here are two offers to buy that were placed on the BST.

1.
2) Once we have your USM order numbers it's a non reversable deal. You must deliver sealed sets, and we must pay as agreed.

2.
1) You buy 5 complete 5 pc 25th anniversary sets (A25) from the mint on the first order day (October 27th) provide me the confirmation #

You can decide for yourself what constitutes an acceptance and commitment in each instance. >>

Both of these require a confirmation # from the Mint. I'd say that makes the deal contingent on the seller successfully placing an order AND successfully receiving THAT order. Even without mentioning the confirmation #, I'd say it is implied that the deal is based on getting orders from the Mint.

Morally, the seller should follow through if he received his order from the Mint. Legally, the buyer might technically have a decent case, but good luck proving it. That's why I say the buyer may not win--try to PROVE the seller successfully placed an order and received it. And then damages are another issue. You would have to prove you had another buyer lined up. There's so much speculation re-selling going on here, and with the limited quanitites and huge demand, a court would probably not deem it reasonable that a buyer relied on a seller (who didn't even have the item in possession) to follow through before doing a re-sale of his own.
And would the damages be based on ebay sales now or 2-3 weeks ago? Even if it got to that point, it would likely be based on 2-3 weeks ago, not the peak of the market.

Also, a lot of the big buyers who had sellers back out were intending to send in the unopened boxes to be graded. That means a new buyer probably hadn't been lined up yet, since buyer #1 would be waiting for grades, which is more speculation on what those coins would actually be worth. Can't just assume the coins would have been 70s or even 69s.

Again, not defending anyone who actually backed out. Just thinking through the practical issues of suing over it. >>

With the order number the buyer can check on the status the same way you can and he will know if it was canceled or if you took delivery.

johnny9434 · November 17, 2011 6:11AM

<< Morons abound all around us.
People that get greedy, people that reneg, people that threaten to sue others....etc etc etc. >>

anything is possible these days.

BAJJERFAN · November 17, 2011 6:12AM

<< 

<< Speak of shipping of these heavy 5 sets, how many of you found it possible to do so for $25 or $35? >>

These heavy beasts are hell on the shipping rate. I have found that 50 ounces of these cost twice as much to ship than 50 ounces of ATBs did. >>

The packaging wasn't exactly light in weight either.

NewParadigm · November 17, 2011 6:20AM

It is irrelevant that the mint didn't fulfill the order. The only way it would be relevant is if were in the contract.

jhdfla · November 17, 2011 6:24AM

Better call Saul...

fishcooker · November 17, 2011 6:42AM

Well, it is 4 yrs and 11 months until the 30th Anniv. Set. They have time to work out the pre-sale details.

Make Sure You Don't Reneg On Selling These Sets

Comments

Leave a Comment